JonA
Senior Member
Hey; I offered to start a thread.
Do you people want it or not?
Do you people want it or not?
-
Features
Why are so-called "progressives" and "liberals" so deferential to religious nonsense by Indians?
- Thread starter Derec
- Start date
Arctish
Centimillionaire
Laugh all you like.
There's an entire village relocating because of the effects of climate change. It will be the first of many. There are invasive species penetrating into the Interior of Alaska and bark beetles chewing up millions of acres of spruce trees because our winters are no longer cold enough to keep them in check. The populations of polar bears, walrus, and seals are declining due to less sea ice forming and what little forms melting away before pupping season. And we've had it easy. Climate change is about to make the entire nation of Tuvalu uninhabitable.
Just because you, personally, don't feel the cost doesn't mean there isn't one. The effects on Alaska alone are huge. Add in everyone else in the world affected by more powerful storms, longer droughts, greater floods, rising sea levels, rising average temperatures, and all the other effects we know about, and possible more we don't, and whatever benefits derived from fracking are so miniscule in comparison they're barely measurable.
I'm more curious why you think its so impossible.
JonA
Senior Member
JonA
Senior Member
Laugh all you like.
There's an entire village relocating because of the effects of climate change. It will be the first of many. There are invasive species penetrating into the Interior of Alaska and bark beetles chewing up millions of acres of spruce trees because our winters are no longer cold enough to keep them in check. The populations of polar bears, walrus, and seals are declining due to less sea ice forming and what little forms melting away before pupping season. And we've had it easy. Climate change is about to make the entire nation of Tuvalu uninhabitable.
Just because you, personally, don't feel the cost doesn't mean there isn't one. The effects on Alaska alone are huge. Add in everyone else in the world affected by more powerful storms, longer droughts, greater floods, rising sea levels, rising average temperatures, and all the other effects we know about, and possible more we don't, and whatever benefits derived from fracking are so miniscule in comparison they're barely measurable.
Over two centuries of consistently-improving living standards throughout the world by harnessing the affordable, dense, and reliable energy of ancient plants demonstrates that the benefits from burning fossil fuels outweigh the costs of doing so.
LOL!
No, I dont want any thread. You have already shown the futility of such a thread...
You have absolutely no idea what you talk about. The cost of burning oil is tremendous and we have not started to pay.
JonA
Senior Member
If your position isn't worth defending, then it's probably not very good...
As you wish.
But do not forget - and I will not either - that you were given a splendid opportunity to present your evidence and turned it down.
A claim you have absolutely no standing to make having outright refused the opportunity to defend it.
As you wish.
But do not forget - and I will not either - that you were given a splendid opportunity to present your evidence and turned it down.
A claim you have absolutely no standing to make having outright refused the opportunity to defend it.
Do you deny that burning fossil fuels is a cause of global warming?
JonA
Senior Member
Of course not.
But that's completely unrelated to the issue of whether the modern world is possible without fossil fuels.
untermensche
Contributor
A thread about what?
The fact that we are using oil as fast as possible when we should be using as little as possible?
JonA
Senior Member
untermensche
Contributor
There you go.
JonA
Senior Member
No. In fact discussing transition states would be off-topic. The thread would only look at the end product: a world that doesn't run on fossil fuels.
No need to show how we get there only that it's currently feasible to be there.
JonA
Senior Member
Are you stupid?
Was that supposed to be anything other than a waste of my time?
Do you plan to actually build and support your position or just be a troll?
untermensche
Contributor
There was a "modern world" (a meaningless phrase) without fossil fuels for thousands of years.
I see no point to your charade.
JonA
Senior Member
If you didnt was so busy being an arrogant twit you would have noticed that i destroyed your previous remark that:
"burning fossil fuels outweigh the costs of doing so"
untermensche
Contributor
Your nonsense is transparent.
It is a dodge from recognition of a serious problem and ignorance to the fact that a lot needs to start NOW.
If I was in charge I would put a dollar tax on every gallon of gas dedicated to alternative energy R&D.
JonA
Senior Member
First, the full claim was:
... the benefits from burning fossil fuels outweigh the costs of doing so
Second, you've destroyed nothing. As anyone able to read English can plainly see, the claim involves measurements of two things: the costs and the benefits.
You have enumerated a single cost that was never in contention.
But that alone does nothing to address the totality of the claim - which cannot be properly addressed without including an examination of the benefits.
Anyway; last call for a thread.
- - - Updated - - -
Yes; you would turn access to one of the world's most vital energy sources into a luxury for the rich.
This does not surprise me about you at all.
But do you have anything supporting the virtue of this other than your own desire to rule and oppress the world?