On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:38 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah I like thorium too. I realise it isn't the universal panacea but > seems like a good bet if handled carefully. >
It's a bit off topic but all my life I've heard people say X is NOT a panacea but never once heard anyone say Y IS a panacea. For something to be meaningful contrasts is needed, If absolutely nothing in the observable universe is a panacea the word would be as useless as if everything was a panacea. > if oil production is still increasing, > It is. > > that isn't good news for the environment. > If increasing oil production keeps 7 billion large mammals (who happen to be my favorite animal) happier healthier and more prosperous than if oil were not increasing I would say increasing oil production is very good news for the human race. Does that mean that some other animals in the environment that aren't on my top ten list will suffer as a result? Probably. > And it *will *peak at some point, > Yes but in general making plans to solve problems that won't show up for more than 15 years usually turns into a farce, it does so for 2 reasons: 1) The problem you foresee has little relation to the problem you eventually end up facing. 2) Do to advancing technology the solution you propose has rapidly become ridiculous. > > the universe will peak and decline eventually of course > And that is why I'm not going to worry about that now. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
