An Inconvenient Truth...

[CheshireVal]

Geez, want some cheese to go with that whine. With everything bad that happenes in this world, my love for a big car is what disgusts you? Or is because I bust my *** every damn day to buy the things I want and give my family a good life? Nothing I have was handed to me. I worked very hard to have what I have and the likes of you are not going to make me feel bad for having it. Yes, I can afford expensive gas and it is not going to stop me from driving what I want. And if mine is the most pompous thing you have ever read, I suggest you read a bit more. Get a grip on reality you child!

A good life?

So what legacy are you leaving behind for your kids there, sport? Or your grandkids?

What about a "good life" for future generations?


And, yeah, actually you are being pretty dang pompous. We all work hard in life. Give us a big freakin' break already.

 

[disneyfan67]

IMO, there is no downside as far as that statement goes. The question for me is 1) how you go about it and 2) how intrusive and balanced the remedies are after the fact. If it is done in a way that doesn't do sudden unnecessary damage to the economy, to jobs, to legal business activity, etc. then let's go. If it just more of the "business is the enemy, we must smite them" stuff, then you'll have a nice clean environment and lose the global economic battle to China and India who are not going to do the same things we do to clean up.
The other potential downside is the possibility of solving the wrong problem and making another problem worse. We really aren't all that flawlessly smart yet, IMO.

That's one of the better responses I've seen yet in these types of arguments. No one has ever answered me when I ask the question: How do we get China, Russia, and India to adpot the rules and play by them. I once heard about 5 months ago former President Clinton say we should implement the changes first to lead the way and then we would have the moral authority on this issue. PLEASE. Like China would ever care about moral authority and only cares about becoming a world super power. India isn't too concerned either. Face the facts it's easy to talk about it, but I doubt any of the Al Gore supporters realise how it will affect us. A starving, out of work American isn't going to care if we have the moral authority when he has no job.

 

[roger_ramjet]

So, it is OK to burn up energy if you say that you really care about the environment? You can ruin the lives of the people of Mauritius, and that's fine, so long as you pretend to care?

OK, then.

If you REALLY cared, you'd switch off your computer. But you don't. You are equally responsible for the fate of of the people of Mauritius, so hop down off that high horse.

I try to minimize my energy use. I could live in a commune if I weren't married, and in fact a life like that wouldn't bother me at all. I'm not in a position to do that, however. Nonetheless, if I could afford a solar-powered generator or any of those other doodads that don't require fossil-fuels, I'd be all over them like a rash. I care - but neither am I in a position to be living in a cave either.

At least I'm not bragging about my energy profligacy. It's the attitude as well as the actions. I'm not perfect in that regard but I sure as hell don't hope for global warming.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I try to minimize my energy use. I could live in a commune if I weren't married, and in fact a life like that wouldn't bother me at all. I'm not in a position to do that, however. Nonetheless, if I could afford a solar-powered generator or any of those other doodads that don't require fossil-fuels, I'd be all over them like a rash. I care - but neither am I in a position to be living in a cave either.

I get it. I got it before. You live your life in the way that makes you happiest. You drive a car, you play on your computer, etc.

At least I'm not bragging about my energy profligacy. It's the attitude as well as the actions.

I'm not bragging, either. I'm just honest. I use up energy and have no intention of changing my life for the environment. Just like you (except I drive a bigger car.)

Attitude doesn't save the environment. And actions speak louder than words.

I'm not perfect in that regard but I sure as hell don't hope for global warming.

That's because you live where it is warm.

 

[Soubrette]

Yikes. Maybe its time to swing a bit back to the center. Environmentalism is about finding ways to conserve energy and looking for alternative sources of energy; to be an environmentalist, one doesn't need to live in a hut sans water and electricity. Yes, I am an environmentalist and I am using a computer; but I also look for energy saving lightbulbs, turn off my air conditioning and open my windows on breezy days, and carpool when possible. Am I a hypocrite, or just someone looking to minimize my eco-footprint given my everyday resources.

Likewise, people who drive SUVs aren't morally corrupt, insensitive fools. They are using the resources that are available to them in a system that encourages increased consumption.

I really hate that the political climate today places people in categories at the complete opposite ends of a continuum. It keeps people from coming up with real solutions, like developing the next generation of transportation that's both safe, sexy, and energy efficient.

 

[roger_ramjet]

I get it. I got it before. You live your life in the way that makes you happiest. You drive a car, you play on your computer, etc. I'm not bragging, either. I'm just honest. I use up energy and have no intention of changing my life for the environment. Just like you (except I drive a bigger car.)

Attitude doesn't save the environment. And actions speak louder than words. That's because you live where it is warm.

I appreciate your honesty. I still don't think it's a helpful attitude, though. The difference is that you use up energy and don't care - I use up energy and at times it bothers me. If I had the means to afford something which used a lot less energy, I would be on it. If I had the same sort of money that bought your SUV I'd use it for a hybrid instead. Perhaps that's a cop out but I think that there is a fundamental difference in our attitudes.

Unfortunately I think the truth is that most of us could do a lot more acting and a lot less 'attituding', and we're all guilty of that in one way or another. I suppose that's part of being human.

 

[Beca]

That's one of the better responses I've seen yet in these types of arguments. No one has ever answered me when I ask the question: How do we get China, Russia, and India to adpot the rules and play by them. I once heard about 5 months ago former President Clinton say we should implement the changes first to lead the way and then we would have the moral authority on this issue. PLEASE. Like China would ever care about moral authority and only cares about becoming a world super power. India isn't too concerned either. Face the facts it's easy to talk about it, but I doubt any of the Al Gore supporters realise how it will affect us. A starving, out of work American isn't going to care if we have the moral authority when he has no job.

See, this is where some mis-information is coming from. I don't know that much about India or Russia, but China is already way ahead of the US where automobiles are concerned. California has the toughest auto emission standards in the nation. A few years ago, the auto industry was really upset because California passed some "super tough" emission standards for the future. The auto industry said there is NO way the standards put into law for the future could be met. Here's the clincher.....those standard govern a certain level of emissions by the year 2020. Americans assume that we must come out with new technology to meet those standards, but those 2020 standards are China's standards for 2006. Not only do we NOT have to come up with new technology, but emerging countries already have it in place.

We would have SOOO many more options for vehicles, and renewable energy at our disposal if our government would sign and abide by Kyoto. And, there are so many opportunities for "high tech" jobs to create new and better technologies...it could be a win-win for the economy as well.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I appreciate your honesty. I still don't think it's a helpful attitude, though. The difference is that you use up energy and don't care - I use up energy and at times it bothers me. If I had the means to afford something which used a lot less energy, I would be on it. If I had the same sort of money that bought your SUV I'd use it for a hybrid instead. Perhaps that's a cop out but I think that there is a fundamental difference in our attitudes.

Unfortunately I think the truth is that most of us could do a lot more acting and a lot less 'attituding', and we're all guilty of that in one way or another. I suppose that's part of being human.

If the hybrid cars worked really well, I'd be happy to get one. If they make an environmentally-friendly, competitively-priced car that I don't hear people complain about, I'll get one. When re-cycling wasn't a pain in the butt, I did that.

I'm all for clean air and stuff, I am just not willing to make any personal sacrifices.

...but I still want global warming. Ice sucks.

 

[Charade]

This is the primary reason that I HOPE gas prices go up to be equivalent to the prices in Europe. $6-7 per gallon will cure many people of their addiction to big cars. Our next "family" car will be a Prius (or maybe a Chinese hybrid if they can get thru the red tape). I recently visited Europe, where a Prius is a LARGE vehicle. If every other country in the world can do without SUV's, so can America. And, if all cars were about the same size, maybe people would drive a little more defensively and we wouldn't need the "extra protection" SUV's accord their drivers.

Sounds like you want to legislate morality. The reason gas is so high in Europe is the taxes. When a government wants to "regulate" something, they usually end up taxing it up the wazoo.

 

[Charade]

They are using the resources that are available to them in a system that encourages increased consumption.

.

Huh? No it doesn't. It encourages choice. Some seem more than willing to place limits (via government interference) on those choice and/or penalize those choices (again via government interference).

 

[KikiFan]

I'm all for clean air and stuff, I am just not willing to make any personal sacrifices.

...but I still want global warming. Ice sucks.

You might want educate yourself a bit on what global warming really means. It doesn't neccesarily mean that it will be warmer. It means that there will be changing and more severe weather. In some locations it could mean colder then usual.

Just out of curiosity, how do you expect to have " clean air and stuff " if you're not willing to make a few sacrifices? No ones asking anyone to radical life altering sacrifices. But if we each make a few easy changes we really can improve the quality of our air.

 

[Planogirl]

Kikifan, I'm glad that you posted that. Global warming leads to temperature extremes and violent storms or so the theory goes. It does not mean that everywhere will become warmer.

I'm amazed that some say that someone using a computer means that they care nothing for the environment. Some of us work on these things and now you're making out like the computer burns more power than anything else. Give me a break!

Plus I agree that the notion that someone should drive a monster SUV for safety when around other big vehicles is bizarre. If all vehicles were a reasonable size then no one would be in danger so that's like saying that all dogs should be small to keep big dogs from winning potential fights. Or something equally silly.

Oh, as for the DISer that made that ridiculous argument, I think that it was a great idea to no longer be able to see your posts for what it's worth. Buh bye.

 

[mrsltg]

Discussions on global warming are always ridiculous. The Earth has been around for how many millions of years? We have been recording weather for about 150. Let's see..... we're going to base what "should be" on a miniscule blip of time (comparitively) when it's obvious the world has not always been this way. Continents used to be connected. Something happened to separate them. How much of the world was covered with ice? Is that how it's "supposed" to be? Of course not. The Earth is a living planet. She changes. We are merely gnats on this planet. Eventually the planet will become inhospitable for humans. Ok. That's how it goes. The difference is, we're too egotistical to accept that WE ARE NOT IN CHARGE.

 

[CheshireVal]

Discussions on global warming are always ridiculous. The Earth has been around for how many millions of years? We have been recording weather for about 150. Let's see..... we're going to base what "should be" on a miniscule blip of time (comparitively) when it's obvious the world has not always been this way. Continents used to be connected. Something happened to separate them. How much of the world was covered with ice? Is that how it's "supposed" to be? Of course not. The Earth is a living planet. She changes. We are merely gnats on this planet. Eventually the planet will become inhospitable for humans. Ok. That's how it goes. The difference is, we're too egotistical to accept that WE ARE NOT IN CHARGE.

But... millions of years ago humans weren't dumping toxins into the air and water. So while we may not have control over Mother Earth and the atmosphere, we sure do have more influence than maybe we should.

 

[Charade]

But... millions of years ago humans weren't dumping toxins into the air and water. So while we may not have control over Mother Earth and the atmosphere, we sure do have more influence than maybe we should.

But millions and millions of years ago there were far more active volcanoes spewing substantially more crap into the air than man has in the last 150.

I'm not saying we shouldn't TRY to be more green but there's a fine balance between being green and moving forward with progress. Sure, it would be nice if everything ran on solar, wind and water power. Maybe someday.

 

[mrsltg]

But... millions of years ago humans weren't dumping toxins into the air and water. So while we may not have control over Mother Earth and the atmosphere, we sure do have more influence than maybe we should.

Fair enough - toxins occur naturally, too, though. And, as I said, there were monumental climate shifts lasting for many thousands of years (the term "glacial pace" means slow for a reason) before humans. We - meaning humans - do command the wind and tide much as we may like to think otherwise.

 

[Fitswimmer]

This issue is like many others, there are two extremes and the real truth is somewhere in the middle.
I believe that we are not God, and we do not have as much control over the climate of the world as we want to think we do. However, we are also stewards of God's creation and as such we need to act with some responsibility for our impact on nature.
I think as consumers, the more demand we place on companies to produce energy saving products, the more energy saving products will be available.

 

[Charade]

I think as consumers, the more demand we place on companies to produce energy saving products, the more energy saving products will be available.

I agree but do you think the government should force that on us by way of taxes and other mandates?

 

[Chicago526]

I agree but do you think the government should force that on us by way of taxes and other mandates?

I'll jump in. To a certain extent, yes. If it wasn't for actions the government has already taken, the enviroment would be even worse off than it already is.

Now I'm NOT saying that the government should all of a suden say that coal power plants need to be phazed out in 5 years, and we all have 2 years to buy a hybred car because in 24 months they are outlawing combustion engines, or extreme things like that. But there are smaller, more incremental steps the government can take to nudge industry along that won't harm the economy, and may even help to spur it along with new inovations in green technology. If we can become a leader in producing green technology, the world will be our market place, that's always a good position for business to be in.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I agree but do you think the government should force that on us by way of taxes and other mandates?

Not by increasing taxes,but the government could and should offer tax breaks to individuals and companies. If it was good business sense for companies to use solar power or purchase hybrid fleet vehicles you bet they'd do it.