VeeshanVault

Aranuil wrote:*files this thread under: WHO FUCKING CARES?*

Much better.

Best post on thread! GOLD STAR for you!!



*stabs thread*

Die!

LOL you are a dumbass.

I'm not advocating car purchases of any sort. As I've said for the fourth fucking time.

Sunserae wrote:

Aranuil wrote:*files this thread under: WHO FUCKING CARES?*

Much better.

Best post on thread! GOLD STAR for you!!



*stabs thread*

Die!

That wouldn't be the chrysler star would it?

Fallanthas are you fucking stupid?

Or do you just see Lalanae posted and you chose to post a rebuttal without reading anything that she wrote?

seriously...you're arguing with yourself here

Lalanae

I agree that people shouldn't be wasteful. =)


I want dearly however for people to be guarded when they hear some doom and gloom enviromental story on the news.



This planet is like a clock with a ton of parts. We know so little about all the systems and cycles that dance in our skies.

I belive in its entirety, the earth is a self correcting system.

Produce too much CO2 and you have a spurt of plankton that balances the surplus back down. A swing on a swingset wants to settle at the bottom of the arc. We as humans can push that swing but ultimately it settles against our efforts. Slowly our planet is drifting into a new global climate. Some scientists say the trend is warming, others say it is cooling. "Remember we've had ice ages where the temp swung large degrees then came back"

I'm rambling,

What I'm trying to say is we know too little about the earth's systems to be so certain about things.

And, we're arrogant to assume that humankind is some powerful stimulus of change given the perspective of how big the planet's systems are.

One volcano erupting pollutes much worse than us. Yet the earth's climate has handled countless eruptions.

Given this awesome scope, just how significant is our pollution?

Until answers for those questions are better understood, we can't say much about the situation.

Personally, I think it brings me closer to God...

i was almost hit by a lady in an suv tonight =-P she was about 3 feet from hittin me

I used to have a toyota starlet, got 45-50 miles per gallon highway. However, that little thing would not pass the emissions test. So, my big full sized truck pollutes the enviroment less than my little compact car did. We had to buy the Astro mini-van because someone decided they were gonna rear-end me and total my starlet.

Truant wrote:Fallanthas are you fucking stupid?

...rhetorical?

Adex- Your electric cars polute more sequence- Lordy what a steaming pile. Damn man, I need a snorkel. Someone else list the blatant flaws in his arguement, I'm too busy strangling him in effigy. A little gold star to the first one to do it.

"Earth is a self correcting system"- That may well be true. The planet may be ok in a while- That doesnt mean its good for US to breath crappy air or drink crappy water in the meantime because we polute more than we need to. It also doesnt mean that the earth corrects itself FAST either. Ok, strictly on current air-pollution issues it probably does correct itself relatively fast if we let it, but that means taking pressure off the system by polluting less. The swing does tend towards the bottom, but only after we stop pushing it up. And all that ignores the typically much longer term damage caused by other forms of pollution and environmental destruction. Heavy metal poisoning and missing rainforests are harder to replace, and missing species harder still...

*Hugs*
Varia

Truant, I read exactly what she wrote. It's akin to worrying about a 4% tax on an item when the buisness selling it is gouging you for 400% markup. It just don't matter.

Clearer?


Varia,

Adex makes a good point. Unless you implement some way to manufacture more electricity cleanly, eletric cars = more pollution. Not to mention more low-level radioactive waste, since most plants are still burning coal.

Here's some advice Varia. It's fine if you want to say that someone's argument is completely flawed, but at least have some informational backing to your statement. "I'm too busy strangling him in effigy" just isn't gonna cut it. That would be like being in an actual debate with him and you just saying, "Your argument is completely baseless and holds absolutely zero truth and I'm going to prove it by sitting here pouting because I'm just so angry." You lose.

Toodles!

I'm sorry you disagree with my electric car example Varia, however my co-worker Stephen did his electrical engineering doctorial thesis on this topic and review commitee accepted it.

I simply summarized the findings.

Actually you want to know what will solve our automobile problems?

Superconductors and fusion.

With superconductors much less energy is lost during the long miles of electricity transmission.

Once we get a stable form of fusion for power generation, the cost to produce energy will be so cheap (and clean), you wouldn't even pay by the watt, a home user would pay a flat rate similar to your cable bill.

Those two things will be ironed out before we die and THEN you can gladly relegate oil to a second tier status as a energy source! =)

Good things are a coming!

Adex, those two items are still a small ways off.

Until then, people are going to take small steps towards them.

You can't go from A to Z without hitting the letters in between.

We'll have that technology active within the next 60 years.

Consider the rate of inovation in the past 60 years and compare it to next 60years X the increase in population as a multiplier.

Inovation over time is exponential.

But you're saying that for the next 60 years to not work on any alternative advancements and just put all our chips on superconductors and fusion.

That's not wise

I'm NOT saying that at all.

Practical steps to reduce pollution such as county enforced recyling are good practices.

There are ways to reduce pollution that are well established that I have no problem with.