Czech president derogates UN global-warming panel

So, we "Stay the Course." Ignore science and buy the oil baron spin doctors. Head in sand technology doesn't have a kind history. Rush? What rush? We aren't doing anything at all about reducing greenhouse gases or finding new fuel sources, and we won't. The oil moguls will make certain of that. Insert head back into sand.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Genji,
As the purveyors of doom are fond of pointing out, we are running out of oil. The less there is, the higher the price will get. The higher the price of oil, the more economical alternative fuels become. Simple economics will solve this problem.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Like I said, just Stay the Course until...we run out of oil. Irresponsibility in the extreme. Nothing doom or gloom about it. I think it's exciting to forge ahead with new technology, something global warming critics, religious fundamentalists (both reject science) and the oil barons fear with every fiber of their being. To act is rushing.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

To point out a problem and encourage a government level discussion on it is Gloom & Doom

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Ignore it and keep those Arabs rich! Just does not make sense to me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Were did I say that? any technology take time to develop, the alternatives are not ready yet, they are not economically viable, and they cannot replace the energy needs of today, unless you want to take our world back a generation, is that what you want? a generation ago we burned coal in unfiltered furnaces, wood, and other fossil fuels and polluted the shit out of the atmosphere, today were have smoke stack scrubbing technology, catalytic converters on our cars, we use unleaded gas, stopped using Freon and a hundred other things to control green house gasses and if we don't do this properly we will end up in the same mess again, the world runs on energy, and today there is no alternative energy source that is able to replace fossil fuels yet, if there is it would be on the market, it isn't, can you name me one source that can meet the energy needs of the world today that is new technology? ready to use today? if you can name it and I will stick my last dime into it as this would make me a billionaire!

 

That's the point BR, we DO NOT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY to change our energy sources on a grand scale, so let's TALK about it as a nation and hopefully through science we can come up with a solution. With the $$$ pissed down the drain in this corrupted administration and it's failed wars we could be well on our way to some progress. Your fear is unfounded. We will not come up with an alternative to imported oil, we will not progress at all in this area, and the oil industry will continue to drive any discussion on the subject into a wall. Swig some mint julip and relax. America ain't goin nowhere, certainly not forward.

 

First of all, I most definately do not reject science, or new technology. Hell, I even considered buying a Prius. I test drove one, but I read that the technology is not really ready for prime time and is quite expensive to repair as the batteries are not covered under the warrenty.

I do not trust the government to do anything. I do not want any government level solutions for problems that can be handled quite well by industry.

 

Genji yes lets talk, but until we have a alternative source we have to get through the now, and if you really want to lay some blame for our energy problems, how about the environmentalist and the democrats who have sealed off our own energy sources, the oil reserves off the California coast, the ANWAR reserves, The Gulf coast, the Florida cost, in the Great Lakes Basin, stopped nuclear energy in its tracks, closed off the coal reserves in Colorado and Nevada, if we were using these sources of energy we maybe wouldn't need to depend on the middle east so heavily, could that be possible? if we used our own energy reserves?

 

Republicans also voted, as a majority, against ANWAR.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

We're talking about OIL ALTERNATIVES. Democrats have taken the lead in that discussion, with science backing them up. Oh, and of course the American people. Something called "election."

 

Democrats have taken the lead in that discussion, with science backing them up. BULLSHIT!

 

I for one think that scientists are much more likely to make baseless political assertions than, say, a Czech president.

 

We know Republicans are doing their best to stifle discussion at a national level, starting with King George's Exxon "scientists" hired to fudge real science about the climate to favor their industry. Corruption doesn't faze righties, they're too busy still yapping about Clinton's blowjob. Over 90% of scientists agree there is a significant global warming trend. Dismiss science if you want, like a typical fundie of any religion, but it WAS the Dems that brought this to the table, which is the ONLY reason your type oppose it and SCIENCE is on our side.

 

LOL! Right. Because science is bunk, right? Why are you on a science forum? But we ALL know! What the Czech prez says is FACT!!!!!!!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Okay I will be the first to agree that global warming is happening. However I will point out that Man's contribution has been negligable at worst. There are 15,000 cvolcanoes on this planet spewing megatons of COrbon Dioxide every day. Now take the sum of human civilization and at our worst we have produced 5% of the carbon dioxide of just one of those volcanoes. Then there is the matter that we are currently the closest to the Sun we have been since the last warming cycle ended. The Sun has also entered a period of solar activity much more active than it has been in mankinds history. These event transpire to make a warming/cooling rollercoaster on wheich we are riding.

 

I have no reason not to believe that could be true, but why do nothing to advance ourselves above primitive fuel sources? Is it possible it's a combination of things? One way or the other we will be forced to deal with our lack of responsibility and end up paying a higher price. Sound gloom & doom? It is in some regions of the world already. Insect devastation across northern reaches spreading disease to animals and wiping out crops is one single example. (Russia, central Asia, Canada.) Is being pro-active in this subject a vast leftwing conspiracy? Do we DARE question Exxon Science? Where is the outrage I wonder?

 

Genj, and your proof that we aren't trying to advance ourselves past fossil fuels? as has been stated before when those energy sources become viable enough to provide more than a fraction of a percentage of the energy needs of this country they will come on line, but right now it take more energy to produce that type of power, than that power produces for use. The only alternative energy that is readily available no that isn't fossil energy based is nuclear, and the rest of the world is using it, but do we in America? no the anti nuke crowed has made sure with their endless court tactics that it become to expensive to open new plants, so here we sit, dependent on foreign oil from a area that is extremely unstable, and requires our attention for national interest, we could have the energy we need from our own sources, and it would give us the time to developed new energy sources, with out having to be dependent on the Middle East Oil, but even if we did this the terrorism wouldn't stop, they have a agenda that supersedes our involvement in the oil from there.

 

Technology isn't energy. "Alternatives" aren't really. There is no economically viable alternative because there won't be. Nuclear isn't it. You can't fly an airplane on nuclear energy for one thing, and it takes alot of fossil fuels to mine and process uranium, to say nothing of construction of plants. It works now only because it is heavily subsidized. We are spoiled by 50 years of cheap energy. Expensive energy won't run the economy as we know it. It's a long shot, but if we use the last remaining fossil fuels to reduce the need for energy, we might be a little better off when it all comes down.

Exploring for new oil sources has a limited return. There are no large reserves left undiscovered. Better technology allows us to exploit small reserves, but they won't last long, and you can't put wilderness back together again. Investment in oil and refineries is a losing proposition.

Driving a Prius isn't the solution. We have to stop thinking in terms of running the national highway system on something else. It's a tremendous waste of energy, better to rebuild the railroads and river ports. The only reason we need to drive everywhere is the car allowed us to build things so far apart.

 

spidergoat, explain Europe, most of their electric power is nuclear? and please provide proof of your cost analyst on nuclear energy, Nuclear energy it would save millions of tons of fossil fuels, and reduce millions of tons of pollutants released into the air, help reduce global warming would it not?, and again tell me of a power source that can today, replace oil for transportation around the world, tell me were the production facilities exist to produce this magic elixir, in quantities large enough to supply the energy need of the U.S. let alone the world, it still is a fact that the alternatives aren't ready for prime time, and there is alternative sources for fossil fuels available to us today to cover the gap until we have alternative sources ready, if we switched to our own reserves do you really thing research into alternatives would stop? technology more on its own, if it viable it will be produced, why because it will make money for the investors, and it will move technology forward for more efficiency in our world, that is the pattern thet has been going on since the beginning of time, when it becomes viable the world move to it, Human Muscle, animal power, wind power, steam power, gas and diesel fuels, nuclear, and eventually the new fuel source that will come when it is developed, man has to move forward it is his genetic imperative, once we stop moving forward we will become extinct as the Dodo Bird, a sad fact of the cycle of life.

 

High taxes, heavily subsidized, oil is still cheap enough to make nuclear power viable. I'm not against it, but it won't solve our problems.

 

Plus Europe wouldn't be handicapped without cars.

 

I think you should stop pretending to possess the power to define independence for Independants.