Sunday, May 6, 2012 4:22:18 PM
@5Cats - Last time you called me a leftie, and now I'm a greenie? I actually *do* think for myself, which is precisely why I`m never going to fit into whatever convenient pigeonhole you want to ascribe to me. And you claim you think for yourself, yet every single post you make on this site is right out of the the republican textbook. I`m not convinced.
As I said, I agree that nuclear energy is a preferable short-term alternative to fossil fuel energy generation. The green attitude to nuclear energy is just as hopelessly reactionary as the right-wing GW denailist stance ... tho at least the green reaction is based on safety concerns rather than a handful of powerful industries concerned about their profits. And biofuel? That`s NOT a viable alternative. Biofuel is one of the token measures I mentioned.
I don`t know what the answer is, but policy needs to be based on dealing with the problem, not on protecting the profits of the fossil fuel industry.
Sunday, May 6, 2012 3:48:44 PM
@artmunki: But the "greenies" HATE Nuclear power! Even though there's enough uranium on Earth to last 1000s of years, and plenty more in the asteroid belt (idk about Mars). So again I point out: the ONE and only viable, low polution energy source is getting ZERO developement by the "clean energy" people. Anyone that dogmatic has to be stupid, evil or both, so I reject their fake studies and think for myself.
"move away from fossile fuel" And HOW exactly does a nation as big as the USA do that? Serious question! Hint: if ALL the food produced in the USA were converted to biofuel, it would NOT replace the gasoline and diesel used.
Sunday, May 6, 2012 2:38:51 PM
@5Cats - yet again you *assume* you know what I'm talking about, then do your best to prove you don`t have a clue. The sort of precautions I`m talking about really just seem like common sense - moving away from polluting, finite and massively subsidised fossil fuel generation, and start seriously trying to develop renewable energy (rather than the pathetic token measures being taken at the moment). That could free every country on the planet from fuel dependancy AND greatly reduce the damage we do to the environment. If it also just happens to reduce the global warming effect ... bonus! And yeah, by all means develop nuclear generation in the meantime, but in case you hadn`t realised, that relies on finite resources too. We`re using up our natural resources as if we`re desperate to get to the end - surely it`s just common sense to try to do something about that before everything`s gone.
Sunday, May 6, 2012 1:00:37 PM
For anyone who would like to get a taste of the complexity of the science surrounding global warming, the rigor of those scientists studying it, and the simplistic attempts to distort it by the far right, I recommend spending nine minutes watching this.
Bottom line: When the overwhelming majority of scientists in the U.S., Europe, and Japan are telling me something, I tend to think it might be a good idea to listen.