24 Jul 08
So I'm reading an article in today's Wall Street Journal about how the area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas – nearly two-thirds the proved gas reserves of the entire Middle East – and 90 billion barrels of oil. The kicker is that any attempt to create an Arctic drilling frenzy will likely meet strong resistance from environmentalists worried about the impact on what is still a near-pristine wilderness.
My debate questions are:
Will the environmentalists still consider the Arctic Circle a near-pristine wilderness after global warming melts the ice and snow?
Have these environmentalists considered that God might have put global warming here to melt the Arctic Circle so that we can get at the oil and natural gas?
Lastly, if we're not going to drill for oil and natural gas in the Arctic Circle, should we put these same environmentalists here so that they won't bedevil normal people?
http://rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=64591
24 Jul 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterMaybe you should try and stop global warming, not initiate it, then use it as a weapon to drill for even more oil.
So I'm reading an article in today's Wall Street Journal about how the area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas – nearly two-thirds the proved gas reserves of the entire Middle East – and 90 billion barrels of oil. The kicker is that any attempt to create an Arctic drilling frenzy will likely meet ...[text shortened]... so that they won't bedevil normal people?
http://rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=64591
25 Jul 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI thought you didn't believe in global warming?
So I'm reading an article in today's Wall Street Journal about how the area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas – nearly two-thirds the proved gas reserves of the entire Middle East – and 90 billion barrels of oil. The kicker is that any attempt to create an Arctic drilling frenzy will likely meet ...[text shortened]... so that they won't bedevil normal people?
http://rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=64591
Anyways,
However you look at gas and oil, it's finite. It's about time we seriously started getting the alternatives lined up for use.
So, if you have some pristine nature lying around somewhere, probably best to leave it as it is. All you will be doing is prolonging the inevitable.
However, if it gets me warmer and better weather, I'm all for even using nuclear weapons.
ANYTHING BUT THIS GOD DAMNED RAIN.
25 Jul 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterBetter question, why would you believe there's all this oil there, more than Global warming is real?
So I'm reading an article in today's Wall Street Journal about how the area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas – nearly two-thirds the proved gas reserves of the entire Middle East – and 90 billion barrels of oil. The kicker is that any attempt to create an Arctic drilling frenzy will likely meet ...[text shortened]... so that they won't bedevil normal people?
http://rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=64591
25 Jul 08
Originally posted by shavixmirYou know some people think this global warming thing means an Ice age.
I thought you didn't believe in global warming?
Anyways,
However you look at gas and oil, it's finite. It's about time we seriously started getting the alternatives lined up for use.
So, if you have some pristine nature lying around somewhere, probably best to leave it as it is. All you will be doing is prolonging the inevitable.
However, if ...[text shortened]... tter weather, I'm all for even using nuclear weapons.
ANYTHING BUT THIS GOD DAMNED RAIN.
25 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterSo you definitely must be from the school of one must destroy the town to save the town, because one of the foremost agents of melting the snow is unbridled fossil fuel consumption, and you are having a cry because of a debate over the finer points of not being allowed to further stuff the planet because it would have already become irrevocably stuffed!
Will the environmentalists still consider the Arctic Circle a near-pristine wilderness after global warming melts the ice and snow?
Now that we are conversing in perfect idiot together, what part of moron are you related to??
25 Jul 08
Originally posted by shavixmirI do believe in global warming, but not that man is causing it or that we can do anything that would be worth the enormous costs of reducing it just a hair.
I thought you didn't believe in global warming?
Anyways,
However you look at gas and oil, it's finite. It's about time we seriously started getting the alternatives lined up for use.
So, if you have some pristine nature lying around somewhere, probably best to leave it as it is. All you will be doing is prolonging the inevitable.
However, if ...[text shortened]... tter weather, I'm all for even using nuclear weapons.
ANYTHING BUT THIS GOD DAMNED RAIN.
I agree that it would be prudent to line up alternatives, but the alternatives right now to burning cheap fossil fuels is expensive, heavily subsidized ethanol that distorts food prices while delivering less bang for the buck.
As far as the Arctic being a pristine wilderness, I don't ever intend on going there, much less staying there for an indefinite period of time. Why all the concern for an area that is pretty much inhospitable to humans? Moreover, there seems little chance of despoiling it with the current state of oil extraction technology. I'd rather have the oil.
25 Jul 08
Originally posted by SmookiePA report by the U.S. Geological Survey is a lot more believable than computer modeling that attempts to predict weather patterns 10, 20 or 100 years into the future.
Better question, why would you believe there's all this oil there, more than Global warming is real?
