Originally posted by whodeyAgreed and try to make a difference himself. Not only talk the talk for millions, but walk the walk.
Indeed. I have some other great ideas. First off, I think we should end all war and establish peace globally. Secondly, I think we should then erradicate all illness and desease. I think Gores ideas to end all carbon emissions into the atmosphere would then be third.
What I don't get is why Gore spends all his time telling us we are bad for using fo ...[text shortened]... t up. Don't tell me the way I live is bad unless you are prepared to show me a better way Al.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI'll tell you why there's so much poverty in America -- because every year tens of millions of immigrants and refugees keep coming in.
You're nuts. I'll tell you why there's so much poverty in America -- because every year tens of millions of immigrants and refugees keep coming in. Think about it: If you gave poor people the option of being poor in the United States vs. being poor anywhere else in the world, where do you think they would choose to be poor? My guess is that they ...[text shortened]... in a U.N. Peacekeeper-run brothel. For someone who goes to college, you sure are foolish.
Xenophobia again ....
Also, the average poor person in America owns multiple color TVs, air conditioning, an automobile etc.
Which slums have you been to? You think Beverly Hills is in poverty?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter"...... choose to be poor in the United States where the government goes out of its way to provide poor people with jobs, education, food stamps, rent assistance and free health care......"
You're nuts. I'll tell you why there's so much poverty in America -- because every year tens of millions of immigrants and refugees keep coming in. Think about it: If you gave poor people the option of being poor in the United States vs. being poor anywhere else in the world, where do you think they would choose to be poor? My guess is that they ...[text shortened]... in a U.N. Peacekeeper-run brothel. For someone who goes to college, you sure are foolish.
The government of the US of A goes 'out of its way' to provide free healthcare??????
Hands up how many people think this is true...
particularly in comparison with the UK let alone the rest of Europe (France/Germany irritatingly have better health services than we do, not irritating 'cos there good but that ours isn't as good.)
Also try looking up where the USA comes in the league tables for education vs the rest of the western world/some of the 'third world'
Also try to remember that the US isn't the only first world country, and that you recently put on the hurricane Katrina show, where the main victims were backbreakingly poor, and had lived in America their hole lives and their parents had probably been in America their whole lives.
I don't want to sound like an America basher (you know what I mean) but spouting on like America is the only first world country and that America does everything best and so on and so fourth is really irritating to the entire rest of the world who you are writing off. Particularly claiming that you have a fantastic free healthcare system when all the press coming out of your country (film TV news...) is story's about people unable to have lifesaving surgery because their insurance company wont pay for it, or who are given massive bills because they didn't get pre approval for life saving surgery after a car crash whilst they were unconscious.... ect...ect... this is what we get told in the outside world, so stating that your healthcare system is more attractive than the national healthcare systems you get in Europe, needs some pretty serious evidence to back it up.
BTW I have visited California and found everyone there very friendly and I had a thoroughly good time, Please don't confuse what I am saying about America the country with Americans who I generally quite like. (whilst still feeling superior... I am British of course)
Originally posted by googlefudgeDon't pay attention to him. He has no idea what he's talking about. He likes living in poverty.
[b]"...... choose to be poor in the United States where the government goes out of its way to provide poor people with jobs, education, food stamps, rent assistance and free health care......"
The government of the US of A goes 'out of its way' to provide free healthcare??????
Hands up how many people think this is true...
particularly in comp ...[text shortened]... o I generally quite like. (whilst still feeling superior... I am British of course)[/b]
OK, people. If you do not start doing EVERYTHING that you can to eliminate your carbon usage, YOU WILL DIE. How important does owning a plasma TV seem when compared with the fact that half of India will be underwater and we'll have a billion refugees? We couldn't effectively deal with the 375000 or so from Katrina. How are we going to handle 2500 times that many people? (Hint: Manhattan won't be available) Start lowering you emissions NOW or your quality of life won't be too important, because you will be DEAD.
Originally posted by randolphHow, with DSR around?
OK, people. If you do not start doing EVERYTHING that you can to eliminate your carbon usage, YOU WILL DIE. How important does owning a plasma TV seem when compared with the fact that half of India will be underwater and we'll have a billion refugees? We couldn't effectively deal with the 375000 or so from Katrina. How are we going to handle 2500 times that ...[text shortened]... you emissions NOW or your quality of life won't be too important, because you will be DEAD.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by randolphOK Climate change will be bad, but not that bad. Exaggeration only gives fodder to people who don't want you to be right.
OK, people. If you do not start doing EVERYTHING that you can to eliminate your carbon usage, YOU WILL DIE. How important does owning a plasma TV seem when compared with the fact that half of India will be underwater and we'll have a billion refugees? We couldn't effectively deal with the 375000 or so from Katrina. How are we going to handle 2500 times that ...[text shortened]... you emissions NOW or your quality of life won't be too important, because you will be DEAD.
Originally posted by randolphYou're predictions are from climate cuckooland. Did you know that they've put "global warming" on hold for the next 10 years? The planet's getting colder, not hotter:
OK, people. If you do not start doing EVERYTHING that you can to eliminate your carbon usage, YOU WILL DIE. How important does owning a plasma TV seem when compared with the fact that half of India will be underwater and we'll have a billion refugees? We couldn't effectively deal with the 375000 or so from Katrina. How are we going to handle 2500 times that ...[text shortened]... you emissions NOW or your quality of life won't be too important, because you will be DEAD.
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=23556
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterthe climate goes on regular swings between hot and cold over decade long periods. If you then add a significant steady upward trend in temperature then what you get is a decade of rapid warming followed by a decade of no warming or a slight cooling followed by another decade of rapid warming, if 'global warming' wasn't real (and know one serious is disputing the rise in temp) then the temp rise over the last decade would be reversed over the next taking us back to where we started, so we can do it all over again in the 20yrs after that, but that isn't what is happening. The evidence for man induced global climate change is overwhelming, the exact consequences of the warming over what time-scale are not clear, but there is no doubt the world is warming because of man made emissions.
You're predictions are from climate cuckooland. Did you know that they've put "global warming" on hold for the next 10 years? The planet's getting colder, not hotter:
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=23556
The question is not if it's happening, but should we take action to limit it? As the consequences of doing nothing seem to be worse than trying to solve the problem, doing something seems to be the best option, you can of course disagree, but you, academically speaking, are in a rapidly shrinking minority. Perhaps instead of sinking your head in the sand you should be clamouring for new technology to enable you to live the life you lead/want to lead without using fossil fuels, instead of trying to hold up progress, until we do run out, by which time you've run out of time.
Plus new technology and associated industries are the backbone of capitalism, you should be looking forward to the green tech/energy revolution.
5 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeYou libs just don't get it do ya? It is like trying to prove that smoking causes cancer. You just CAN'T seem to be able to do it. Sure, you can use correlations and logic and medical knowledge to dissuade people but those who want to smoke will simply continue to do so despite what everyone knows about it but can't prove about it. Then couple this with the fact that greed tends to override logic and doing the "right" thing and what you have is a situation that is NEVER going to change......unless you find a viable alternative.
the climate goes on regular swings between hot and cold over decade long periods. If you then add a significant steady upward trend in temperature then what you get is a decade of rapid warming followed by a decade of no warming or a slight cooling followed by another decade of rapid warming, if 'global warming' wasn't real (and know one serious is dispu backbone of capitalism, you should be looking forward to the green tech/energy revolution.
That is what should be the focus. I don't know of many who would argue the need to get off foriegn oil because the reasons are all around us. Global warming is just one in a myriad of them.
If liberals cared as much as they say they do and think that the planet is close to destruction, why is it that they oppose other viable energy alternative such as nuclear energy? Perhaps it is because that is dangerous as well? Maybe it has its dangers, but at least it may prevent global warming from destroying us completly!! All libs seem to want to do is tax us more to try and find green energy that is not currently viable. So what are the chances they will find one, let alone implement it on a mass scale within the next 10 years?