,,,that can reduce CO2 and thus global warming without changing our lifestyles, says H. Sterling Burnett, an Environment Analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"Any technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere should be given serious consideration as an alternative to taxes or carbon caps as a way to reduce emissions," said Burnett. "If global warming is a problem, technology is the only way out of it that won't damage the economy and place undue burdens upon the poor."
Burnett goes on to say that environmentalists are opposed to geo-engineering solutions because they don't demand sacrifice. They are not concerned about global warming or CO2 emissions, but rather about their power to control how we live. They want to force people to live less consumptive lifestyles.
DSR: At the end of the end of the day, most environmentalists are a bunch of rich, selfish, pagan, neo-hippies who are divorced from proper religion, work and common sense.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterOne dude has a biased opinion of environmentalists. OK, thanks for the info.
,,,that can reduce CO2 and thus global warming without changing our lifestyles, says H. Sterling Burnett, an Environment Analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"Any technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere should be given serious consideration as an alternative to taxes or carbon caps as a way to reduce emissions," said B ...[text shortened]... selfish, pagan, neo-hippies who are divorced from proper religion, work and common sense.
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterfoolish over simplification. displays much ignorance.
,,,that can reduce CO2 and thus global warming without changing our lifestyles, says H. Sterling Burnett, an Environment Analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"Any technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere should be given serious consideration as an alternative to taxes or carbon caps as a way to reduce emissions," said B ...[text shortened]... selfish, pagan, neo-hippies who are divorced from proper religion, work and common sense.
You demonstrate virtually no command of the existing data out there on people who consider themselves environmentalists and do not in any way fit your pin-headed description.
see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17950339/
see also, for example, http://www.qtww.com/
Had coffee yesterday with good friend who serves on Quantum Fuel's board of directors. He is an environmentalist -- he likes to kiss younger women, not trees. But he is serious about developing advanced technologies to make our way of life sustainable.
You ought to look into this subject more carefully and stop moving your mouth without first engaging your brain.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThere are 6 billion people out there ...
,,,that can reduce CO2 and thus global warming without changing our lifestyles, says H. Sterling Burnett, an Environment Analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"Any technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere should be given serious consideration as an alternative to taxes or carbon caps as a way to reduce emissions," said B ...[text shortened]... selfish, pagan, neo-hippies who are divorced from proper religion, work and common sense.
yes,there are a few people who want change for the sake of change and will use environmental justification as an excuse(they are idiots).
and there are a few people who are worried that another few people want change for the sake of change and will use environmental justification as an excuse(they are also idiots).
and there is an environmental problem.
and most people just want the problem fixed(they are sensible).
Originally posted by ScriabinNeither Dr. Burnett, nor myself are opposed to market solutions to environmental or energy problems. I do have a problem with people like Al Gore, Ted Turner and the Sierra Club, exactly the kinds of people I described earlier.
foolish over simplification. displays much ignorance.
You demonstrate virtually no command of the existing data out there on people who consider themselves environmentalists and do not in any way fit your pin-headed description.
see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17950339/
see also, for example, http://www.qtww.com/
Had coffee yesterday with good ...[text shortened]... into this subject more carefully and stop moving your mouth without first engaging your brain.
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritteryes but to call them enviromentalists is to call torquemada christian.
Neither Dr. Burnett, nor myself are opposed to market solutions to environmental or energy problems. I do have a problem with people like Al Gore, Ted Turner and the Sierra Club, exactly the kinds of people I described earlier.
there are stupid or hypocritical people in all categories. generalization of this kind is ignorant at best.
EDIT: if you add "some" in your initial post, i for one would have no problem.
Originally posted by ZahlanziHow about if I say, "The ones generating the most publicity and having the biggest impact on policy?"
yes but to call them enviromentalists is to call torquemada christian.
there are stupid or hypocritical people in all categories. generalization of this kind is ignorant at best.
EDIT: if you add "some" in your initial post, i for one would have no problem.
Originally posted by der schwarze Rittererrr that might be correct too, since most of the ones generating the impact are the hypocrites. i never heard of people from greenpeace but i did heard of al gore. but that still doesn't mean that there isn't one environmental that isn't a hypocrite and generates publicity. so just use the word "some"
How about if I say, "The ones generating the most publicity and having the biggest impact on policy?"
let go of the anger and abandon the dark side. much bigotry i sense in you.
- Joined
- 30 Dec 07
- Moves
- 9905
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThat's stupid... is there any proof of this, or does the environmental analyst need to get fired for lack of logical, researched analysis.
,,,that can reduce CO2 and thus global warming without changing our lifestyles, says H. Sterling Burnett, an Environment Analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"Any technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere should be given serious consideration as an alternative to taxes or carbon caps as a way to reduce emissions," said B ...[text shortened]... selfish, pagan, neo-hippies who are divorced from proper religion, work and common sense.
