Hi Steve, I just read your recent post after basically ignoring the conversation brewing here on ENTS because I thought you guys were playing a rhetoric game, teasing out alternative viewpoints for intellectual development's sake, but now that I read this, I'm not so sure.
Are you stating these beliefs in this forum because you honestly believe them or are these beliefs your are putting out there to play "devel's advocate" to the popular opinion of the global scientific community? I'm asking this honestly. It is the internet - you could be a dog, you could be the dalai lama. Not suggesting you are either. The tone of this conversation seems playful - yet we have a global community of citizens working with what we feel is a crisis. In either case, being at odds on a fundamental level with so many of your fellow man on what they regard to be a global, man-influenced crisis should at least raise an eyebrow of concern for you. No? Karl Karl Cronin dry earth p: +1.718.916.3528 w: dryearth.org face: http://tinyurl.com/naturedance tweet: dryearth Check out our new website! www.dryearth.org //////////////////////////////////////////////////// On Apr 8, 2009, at 5:12 PM, Steven Springer wrote: > Don, > > It seems to me that you are avoiding taking a stand, other than that > the Global Warming Scenario remains unproven to your satisfaction. > > I am supposing that my position regarding Global Warming is pretty > obvious based on my argumentation—I believe the purported Global > Warming alarm being sounded is a political hoax based mostly on > faulty and inconclusive data. > > I'm satisfied that that will remain so beyond your anticipated > lifetime. Given that, do you propose that it makes sense to > continue to extract every single energy resource until they each and > every one run out? > > Obviously not, I am not opposed to alternative fuels; most likely > they will come as technological progress occurs. I am no economist > but I suspect the resource markets regulate themselves through > supply & demand. If we were to run out of worldwide crude, another > energy source would emerge to accommodate the demand. (Will we > actually run out of crude?) We are hearing that there are many more > wells yet to be tapped. I do not know if this is or isn’t true. > The market may change with the emergence of alternative fueled > vehicles and this actually may become a mute issue. > > Do you propose that we (local, regional, national, global) should > continue repopulating this earth without control to accelerate the > time in which each and every energy resource runs out? > > This seems a bit rhetorical, don’t you think? History has shown that > populations rise and decline based upon resource availability (as > well as other reasons). Will this happen to the United States? > Maybe, I am no prophet. I suspect that you might share my > conclusion on this. > > Do you see a solution? > > I am not so sure that I see the problem! I am reminded of the > children’s story of Chicken Little who sounded the alarm “The sky is > falling! The sky is falling!” Or of the boy who cried wolf. When > something was actually happening, the townspeople doubted the alarm > because of past unfounded hysteria. I believe that this is what is > occurring with the Global Warming issue and could also damage future > environmental management needs. > > My suspicion is that there are others on this board who share my > reasoning and logic concerning Global Warming. I know that there > are many outside. > > Steve > > p.s. I still have enjoyed our thought provoking discussion! > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of DON BERTOLETTE > Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 3:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > > Steve- > It seems to me that you are avoiding taking a stand, other than that > the Global Warming Scenario remains unproven to your satisfaction. > I'm satisfied that that will remain so beyond your anticipated > lifetime. Given that, do you propose that it makes sense to > continue to extract every single energy resource until they each and > every one run out? > Do you propose that we (local, regional, national, global) should > continue repopulating this earth without control to accelerate the > time in which each and every energy resource runs out? > Do you see a solution? > -Don > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:23:49 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > The political issues that you have sited are able to stand or fall > based on their own merited arguments. Global Warming logic > presented would only serve as a ‘red herring’ introduction serving > to add fuel to an ever growing suspicious public regarding logical > and relevant scientific theory. > > Let's pretend that we act vigorously on climate change and 50 years > from now we discover the global scientific community is full of > morons and global warming is not real. > > Let’s act on an unproven hypothetical (Global Warming OR any other > subject that may strike our personal fancy) and then examine our > public creditability in the future. Do not forget that it was not > that long ago that many in the scientific populace were convinced > that the sun revolved around the earth and that our planet was > flat. Perhaps, we can imagine how political policy might have > looked based on these “scientific breakthroughs” back then. > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Ryan McEwan > Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 12:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Even if you think it is a hoax > > Even if you cannot be convinced by the IPCC or anything else. Even > if you remain convinced the whole thing is a fabrication. Most of > the steps needed to address global climate change are also steps to > address the two of the three most important issues the US faces- > national security and the economy (the other being health care). > > Most of the steps to address global warming are also those that > reduce our need for foreign oil- which funds fundamentalism and > unrest in some parts of the Middle East- which is still the most > important National Security threat facing the US. > > AND alternative energy both stimulates the economy (new business > creation, etc) and also breaks us away from wild fluctuations in the > cost of petro- which is a major economic issue (in more stable times > at least). Renewable energy also pulls us away from the "Boom and > Bust" economic cycle associated with fossil fuels, that has ravaged > so many communities (see- coal in Appalachia). > > Let's pretend that we act vigorously on climate change and 50 years > from now we discover the global scientific community is full of > morons and global warming is not real. What a shame it will be to > have renewable energy production in the US as a replacement for > Middle East oil, smog free cities, consistent fuel costs, fuel > efficient homes and cars, a new energy economy, all for nothing!!. > What a waste! > > > > Quick access to your favorite MSN content and Windows Live with > Internet Explorer 8. Download FREE now! > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
