MonteQuest wrote:
Duh????
Maybe it's time to explain photosynthesis.....
MonteQuest wrote:
Duh????
Ludi wrote:MonteQuest wrote:
Duh????
Maybe it's time to explain photosynthesis.....
MonteQuest wrote:Snik wrote: Are you saying that this captured carbon was in the atmosphere previously?
Duh????
AgentR wrote:The ban does have one interesting advantage as is. The longer we hold it untapped; the more valuable it becomes.
44Flattop wrote:AgentR wrote:The ban does have one interesting advantage as is. The longer we hold it untapped; the more valuable it becomes.
Not really. It's going to be gone. While we diddle around talking ourselves to death the Chinese, Cubans and Spanish among others trying to get their foot in the door, are all offshore drilling OUR oil.
For some dumb reason only made clear by the Liberal/Soclalists, its OK to let everyone else drill OUR oil but its not ok for us. Hmmmmmmm.
44
Ludi wrote:So are you saying, it is putting ourselves above nature to try to limit our numbers through birth control?
MonteQuest wrote:MrBean wrote: The goal of "helping" nature by reducing our numbers (before we can do more damage on numerical scale and so helping also more of our numbers survive) may seem noble at first, but it's not radical enough, it still repeats the assumption that we are somehow above nature, "supernatural", treating nature as object of human subject.
So, mankind shouldn't limit his numbers as it is an affront to nature?
Ludi wrote:MonteQuest wrote:
Duh????
Maybe it's time to explain photosynthesis.....
Snik wrote:Yeah, mistake acknowledged, and removed. Don't know what I was thinking when I wrote that (go ahead, have a field day as I know you will/already have).
The rest of my post to Big-Tex stands. Are you really from Texas? I don't meet too many people down here with that kind of attitude. We're usually more of a "let's get it done" than the "wringing the hands, woe is me" type.
MrBean wrote: No, not numbers, just fertility. Nature will take care of the numbers.
Snik wrote:Lol.....yeah, it's kind of fun actually. Discussions like this is what it's all about isn't it? I actually think minds, well, some minds, can be changed, or at least altered a bit to allow at least the chance that there are other possibilities.
Snik wrote:Will drilling alone solve this problem? No. But why would we leave those reserves in the ground? For what purpose? They are doing no one any good underground.
Jenab6 wrote:Carbon that stays in the ground is not in the air, raising the global temperature, turning arable regions into deserts, raising the ocean temperature possibly to the point of a mass release of methane from hydrides. That's the good that oil does when it stays in the ground. Powerdown ASAP is more nearly correct than going hell-for-leather on everything we can do to postpone powerdown.
AlexdeLarge wrote:Jenab6 wrote:Carbon that stays in the ground is not in the air, raising the global temperature, turning arable regions into deserts, raising the ocean temperature possibly to the point of a mass release of methane from hydrides. That's the good that oil does when it stays in the ground. Powerdown ASAP is more nearly correct than going hell-for-leather on everything we can do to postpone powerdown.
Willing to bet your job? Your kids dinner?? Algore Is !!
What if he is wrong and all this is "Politically Correct" hype???
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscor ... 42304.html
Hello Al Gore; Hello UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Your science is flawed; your hypothesis is wrong; your data is manipulated. And, may I add, your scare tactics are deplorable. The Earth does not have a fever. Carbon dioxide does not cause significant global warming.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests