The Right Approach to Global Warming - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-29-2006, 02:05 AM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 09:23 AM
The best aproache is not pollluting and consuming up the planet
Tell me , what is wrong with being carefull with energy use, stop using to much polluting materials ( and eat ecologic food ). Maybe it does not change the global warming but at the end we will have a better planet,..

I don`t care if the world is warming up by humanity or by natural causes. We should be carefull an responsable with our home call earth anyway.
__________________

__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 02:26 AM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:23 PM
Well for starters the land required for "ecological food" (I assume that you mean so-called organic pesticide free vegetables) is significantly greater than that with those technologies, we would not have enough land to produce the food to feed people.

We expect to be able to live our lives with consumable products, electricity and high living standards. These things are going to be coming to more and more people over the coming decades and it is simply impossible for these to be delivered without using up resources and investing in new technologies. Humanity will have a lower impact when we can deliver clean energy cheaper than fossil fuels and can maximise land use even furthur.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 02:36 AM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Well for starters the land required for "ecological food" (I assume that you mean so-called organic pesticide free vegetables) is significantly greater than that with those technologies, we would not have enough land to produce the food to feed people.

.
No, i don`t mean pestcides free but we should be very carefull using it.

Well, a lot of land is used to produce food for animals, look at the uuuuuggggeeee soya fields in Brazil . At the end, meatproduction is more energy using, more harmfull for nature , and the transport cost for meat is also less effecient that the transport of vegies.

No, i am not a vegitarian
__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 02:45 AM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:23 PM
Quote:
the transport cost for meat is also less effecient that the transport of vegies.
People have to eat a lot more vegetables to get the benefits of a lot less meat.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 04:28 AM   #20
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:23 AM
Re: The Right Approach to Global Warming

Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Michael Shermer (editor of Skeptic)
I heard him on George Noory's radio show once debating some other guests and he got owned like a fith grader trying to box Mike Tyson in 1988.

It was hilarious.

Maybe his opinion on this matter is 100% correct, just saying in general, he was owned when put face to face with some good critical debate. Not unlike just about anyone who is asked to stand up for opinions outside of their comfort zone.

It was actually funny. The Penn and Teller show 'Bullshit' painted him as some source of skeptic knowledge and he was good of course great on their show but he got embarassed when Penn Gillette or his buddies couldn't edit his content.

I like that show alot, I actually think the guy does make some sense, I've seen hijm on the ol' Kevin Nealon show and a few others, as well as all the History channel and Discovery shows, but a free form debate to answer some of the unexplained, he's useless. In other words, he's needs the official version to work or he's got nothing. When presented with something he can't explain, he becomes the worst skpetic of all, he starts inventing reasons rather than just saying "I don't know".

He is a smart guy and he has a lot of great answers and healthy skepticism, I just have roll my eyes when someone can't answer a question and just bullshits there way out of it rathe rthan saying " I don't really know, we don't know". Fuck, there is no answer to things like the Phoenix lights or Mexico City, or dozens of other incidents, when you as a skeptic start inventing the answers, you are no better than a religous nut apologizing for a void.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 04:55 AM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:23 PM
The Phoenix Lights were aerial flares from a training excercise by the Air Force. There is no substantaitive evidence of extra terrestrials and skepticism to wild claims is perfectly reasonable.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 05:29 AM   #22
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Rono
The best aproache is not pollluting and consuming up the planet
Tell me , what is wrong with being carefull with energy use, stop using to much polluting materials ( and eat ecologic food ). Maybe it does not change the global warming but at the end we will have a better planet,..

I don`t care if the world is warming up by humanity or by natural causes. We should be carefull an responsable with our home call earth anyway.
__________________
Salome is online now  
Old 07-29-2006, 09:18 AM   #23
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 07:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Well for starters the land required for "ecological food" (I assume that you mean so-called organic pesticide free vegetables) is significantly greater than that with those technologies, we would not have enough land to produce the food to feed people.

We expect to be able to live our lives with consumable products, electricity and high living standards. These things are going to be coming to more and more people over the coming decades and it is simply impossible for these to be delivered without using up resources and investing in new technologies. Humanity will have a lower impact when we can deliver clean energy cheaper than fossil fuels and can maximise land use even furthur.
I think that is the entire point. Strange and difficult to grasp, I know. Since the industrial revolution society has moved at warp speed comparably. There's no valid reason beyond gluttonous waste and laziness that we keep it up at this pace.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 09:36 AM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:23 PM
I would argue that keeping it up at this pace is what will ultimately solve the problems of today and giving us both rewards and risks that we cant possibly imagine.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 10:15 AM   #25
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 07:23 PM
Ah, to have faith in something we can't even imagine. Look at what we've damaged in the last 200-250 years. Compare it to a thousand years before that. See a slight increase? And what exactly are we/science doing to slow it down, let alone stop it?
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 11:36 AM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Rono
The best aproache is not pollluting and consuming up the planet
Tell me , what is wrong with being carefull with energy use, stop using to much polluting materials ( and eat ecologic food ). Maybe it does not change the global warming but at the end we will have a better planet,..

I don`t care if the world is warming up by humanity or by natural causes. We should be carefull an responsable with our home call earth anyway.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-29-2006, 12:36 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 03:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Rono
The best aproache is not pollluting and consuming up the planet
Tell me , what is wrong with being carefull with energy use, stop using to much polluting materials ( and eat ecologic food ). Maybe it does not change the global warming but at the end we will have a better planet,..

I don`t care if the world is warming up by humanity or by natural causes. We should be carefull an responsable with our home call earth anyway.
That's probably the best approach to it. The way we currently live is like giving the planet as a whole a big middle finger. Sooner or later it'll catch up to us and I don't want to be the primary reason for another mass extinction.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 07-30-2006, 12:15 AM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
Ah, to have faith in something we can't even imagine. Look at what we've damaged in the last 200-250 years. Compare it to a thousand years before that. See a slight increase? And what exactly are we/science doing to slow it down, let alone stop it?
What was the average life expectancy for humans 250 years ago again?

If this was only about reducing CO2 emissions than you'd think the global-warming alarmists would be praising the virtues of nuclear energy. But that's never gonna happen is it? Why? Because before the siren cry of global-warming there was the China Syndrome and forecasts of three-eyed fish and uninhabitable cities. Sure, there's some science in those scenarios, but not much. Sorta like the catastrophic predictions of many global-warming computer models. More a desire to get noticed and therefore receive more research grants than real science. What? You really think a study that concludes "Nothing to do with man, it's just how our planet works." is going to get additional funding when the other guy's study predicts "Florida to be underwater in 10 years!"

No, too much of this issue is really about the "sin against nature" of energy consumption by human beings, Western civilization in particular, and the desire by some to strangle future industrialization and growth. Under the guise of environmentalism.

If human activity is indeed changing our climate then technology and free-markets, not more political control over the world's energy use, is where the answer lies. Some of you need a little more confidence in human creativity and resiliency and a little less propensity to believe scaremongers with an agenda.

Sorry not have a PowerPoint presentation to go along with this.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-30-2006, 03:35 AM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:23 PM
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-30-2006, 03:45 AM   #30
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 07:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


What was the average life expectancy for humans 250 years ago again?

If this was only about reducing CO2 emissions than you'd think the global-warming alarmists would be praising the virtues of nuclear energy. But that's never gonna happen is it? Why? Because before the siren cry of global-warming there was the China Syndrome and forecasts of three-eyed fish and uninhabitable cities. Sure, there's some science in those scenarios, but not much. Sorta like the catastrophic predictions of many global-warming computer models. More a desire to get noticed and therefore receive more research grants than real science. What? You really think a study that concludes "Nothing to do with man, it's just how our planet works." is going to get additional funding when the other guy's study predicts "Florida to be underwater in 10 years!"

No, too much of this issue is really about the "sin against nature" of energy consumption by human beings, Western civilization in particular, and the desire by some to strangle future industrialization and growth. Under the guise of environmentalism.

If human activity is indeed changing our climate then technology and free-markets, not more political control over the world's energy use, is where the answer lies. Some of you need a little more confidence in human creativity and resiliency and a little less propensity to believe scaremongers with an agenda.

Sorry not have a PowerPoint presentation to go along with this.
You think the life expectancy increase is due to what damage we've done to the environment? I am failing to understand what this has to do with anything when life expectancy is largely due to increases in health and medical research and access to the results of such. And then you finish with the cute jab about a PowerPoint presentation. Ironic. But that's your problem.

Anyway, even you wrote "If human activity is indeed changing our climate..." so your post is about as imformative as anyone else's in this thread and of those not involved in working on it so to state that the opposing view is a result of scaremongering is about as worthy as me saying you are one of the ignorant stupid arses who are indifferent to the real effects humans have on this planet.
__________________

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com