Innovating out of global warming

[piercehawkeye45]

How does how much energy Gore uses have anything to do with global warming? It is just a cheap shot that brings no significance to the argument.

Also, how can anyone be so sure that they are right about global warming when we don't have proof of any reason?

[Griff]

My family of four used about 6720 kWh last year.

Generating electricity is how most CO^2 is freed up.

[tw]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

How does how much energy Gore uses have anything to do with global warming?

It demonstrates how destructive we all will be if we stifle innovation - as an MBA like George Jr advocates.

Why are Japanese and German autos so much in demand all over the world? Because they innovated - installed technologies that create less pollution - are therefore more reliable, cost less to build, cost less to operate, and create more jobs - for them. Where did those innovations come from? Mostly from America in companies that insisted cars don't pollute and therefore stifled American innovations.

Why does GM not have overhead cams, 70 Hp/liter engines, and hybrids? Those innovations that make less pollution, consume less energy, make people more productive, even eliminate the $130 tune up every three months ... all resulted because those American innovations, instead, appeared in foreign products.

Why in foreign products? Same mentality that stifled American innovation in the 1970s again wants to stifle innovation in 2000s. Same people who insisted auto pollution control was not possible now deny global warming. At what point are we condemned to relive a history we did not learn from?

What does a 'global warming does not exist' mentality have in common with those 1970 auto execs? Both insisted that environmental solutions would destroy jobs, destroy the economy, and have us all driving Pintos. Therefore others now have our jobs and stronger industries in their economies. At what point do those who 'deny global warming' stop stifling innovation to destroy American jobs, strength, wealth, and health?

We are supposed to learn from history. History says nations who confront global warming and who therefore innovate will be world leaders - richer, wealthier, healthier, dominant, better respected, with more jobs, and with royalty incomes from those other nations who did not innovate.

Al Gores household today is what we all will be doing twenty years from now if we deny - stifle innovation. Why does Al Gore's household consume so much power? Where are the innovations to eliminate the problem? Well, considering how many Americans are now thinking like Rush Limbaugh, just more products we will have to buy from foreigners. Just more industries that must collapse like GM and big steel only because they were anti-Americans; feared to innovate.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

How does how much energy Gore uses have anything to do with global warming? It is just a cheap shot that brings no significance to the argument.

Bull shit. The President wana-bee should not be telling me to clean up my act as he jets around the country from one of his four houses to the next. If he uses the same amount of energy in one month (green house gas emission) as I use in a year, he is a hypocrite and needs to STFU. Pretty simple to me.

[glatt]

If the cheap shot doesn't appear to be working, by all means, go ahead and take another one, Mercenary.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by glatt

If the cheap shot doesn't appear to be working, by all means, go ahead and take another one, Mercenary.

He's got a point. Same with Prince Charles coming to Philly then New York, with his whole gang, to accept that award for his environmental goodness. while in the process, caused enough extra energy use by the police and people sitting in traffic jams, to start a war over.

Acceptance of the message has a lot to do with the messenger.... like it or not, that's the way the world works. It will be accepted or rejected on trust, faith in the messenger, because people won't dig for the basis of the message. And in this case, the more they dig the more confusing it gets.

tw, going off on real Americans, true patriots, that 70hp per liter horseshit, MBAs, the lying prez, yada, yada, yada, doesn't win friends and influence people either.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

If the cheap shot doesn't appear to be working, by all means, go ahead and take another one, Mercenary.

The truth behind the messengers double standard are blantent and difficult to accept. I understand your desire to stick your head in the sand as the message is important. But you need to take a closer look at the man behind the curtain.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Acceptance of the message has a lot to do with the messenger.... like it or not, that's the way the world works.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

The truth behind the messengers double standard are blantent and difficult to accept.

Gore is hardly the only messenger on global warming. It him and how many thousands of scientists?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

Gore is hardly the only messenger on global warming. It him and how many thousands of scientists?

I agree, but funny how it took a political loser and a budget slide show to get the word out to the Congress.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by glatt

Gore is hardly the only messenger on global warming. It him and how many thousands of scientists?

I don't know how many, what's 50% of all of them?

The problem is the when you say Global Warming, you are not just talking about global warming. You are inferring a shitload of other things that may or may not be true. When somebody says they agree with you on Global Warming, then they are saying they buy into everything you believe about it.

That's just stupid. To put my opinion at the mercy of someone else's whims? I refuse to buy into that crap. I have my own opinions and no amount of bullying, insulting or accusations of being anti-American from anyone, is going to make me swallow the whole Global Warming the sky is falling package.

If Gore had his way, Global Warming would be right up there with, "Homeland Security" or "It's For The Children", so no questions, do as your told.

You want my help, then break it down. Tell why it's bad? Tell me how bad it will get? Tell me why It's my fault? Tell me what I can do and how it will change anything?
I don't want to hear if I sacrifice then something good may happen somewhere, someday.
Stick your fairy tales. I want facts and you ain't got 'em.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

You want my help, then break it down. Tell why it's bad? Tell me how bad it will get? Tell me why It's my fault? Tell me what I can do and how it will change anything?
I don't want to hear if I sacrifice then something good may happen somewhere, someday.
Stick your fairy tales. I want facts and you ain't got 'em.

All very fair questions. And Gore's personal use of energy has no bearing whatsoever on the answers. You don't like a message, question the message. Don't take cheap shots at the messenger. (directed at Mercenary, not you.)

[bluesdave]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I don't know how many, what's 50% of all of them?

The problem is the when you say Global Warming, you are not just talking about global warming. You are inferring a shitload of other things that may or may not be true. When somebody says they agree with you on Global Warming, then they are saying they buy into everything you believe about it.

That's just stupid. To put my opinion at the mercy of someone else's whims? I refuse to buy into that crap. I have my own opinions and no amount of bullying, insulting or accusations of being anti-American from anyone, is going to make me swallow the whole Global Warming the sky is falling package.

If Gore had his way, Global Warming would be right up there with, "Homeland Security" or "It's For The Children", so no questions, do as your told.

You want my help, then break it down. Tell why it's bad? Tell me how bad it will get? Tell me why It's my fault? Tell me what I can do and how it will change anything?
I don't want to hear if I sacrifice then something good may happen somewhere, someday.
Stick your fairy tales. I want facts and you ain't got 'em.

Well Bruce, we have had this discussion before and I stupidly believed that I had made some impact on your opinions - at least let you open your mind to the possibility that we might be right. I cited several web sites that covered global warming in a reasonable manner, and you seemed to be satisfied then, but now you have reverted to your old beliefs.

As I said once before, we cannot design an experiment that will "prove" man's influence on global warming. We know that man has increased greenhouse emissions, and we know from statistical analysis and records going back thousands of years (eg. ice core samples), that while the current warming period is not unheard of, the *speed* at which it is taking effect is what alarms us. The fact that there have been other warm periods in Earth's history, and that we are not yet at the highest temperature, does not mean that the current global warming is not man induced. I am not necessarily endorsing Al Gore, because he has a political agenda, but this does not mean that he is wrong.

And the figure is more like 90% of us believe that it is man induced, not 50%.

[Happy Monkey]

Gannett

House Republican Leader John Boehner would have appointed Rep. Wayne Gilchrest to the bipartisan Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming -- but only if the Maryland Republican would say humans are not causing climate change, Gilchrest said.

"I said, 'John, I can't do that,' " Gilchrest, R-1st-Md., said in an interview. "He said, 'Come on. Do me a favor. I want to help you here.' "

Gilchrest didn't make the committee. Neither did other Republican moderates or science-minded members, whose guidance centrist GOP members usually seek on the issue.
...

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, a research scientist from Maryland, and Michigan's Rep. Vern Ehlers, the first research physicist to serve in Congress, also made cases for a seat, but weren't appointed, he said.
"Roy Blunt said he didn't think there was enough evidence to suggest that humans are causing global warming," Gilchrest said. "Right there, holy cow, there's like 9,000 scientists to three on that one."

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Bull shit. The President wana-bee should not be telling me to clean up my act as he jets around the country from one of his four houses to the next. If he uses the same amount of energy in one month (green house gas emission) as I use in a year, he is a hypocrite and needs to STFU. Pretty simple to me.

IOW TheMercenary hates innovation; loves the status quo. No way around that post. TheMercenary hates innovation - that which characterizes and defines a patriotic American. So what does that define TheMercenary as?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

IOW TheMercenary hates innovation; loves the status quo. No way around that post. TheMercenary hates innovation - that which characterizes and defines a patriotic American. So what does that define TheMercenary as?

What are you? Like 20 years old? How would you draw such conclusions?