Why are so-called "progressives" and "liberals" so deferential to religious nonsense by Indians?

[JonA]

We can reduce our reliance on coal and foreign oil without harming people and destroying the environment in the way that fracking does.

Willing to back that claim up?

 

[Trausti]

We can reduce our reliance on coal and foreign oil without harming people and destroying the environment in the way that fracking does.

Willing to back that claim up?

Unicorn farts.

 

[KeepTalking]

We can reduce our reliance on coal and foreign oil without harming people and destroying the environment in the way that fracking does.

Willing to back that claim up?

Yes, and I am willing to do so right here in this very thread. Feel free to ask any questions you would like to ask of me.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Willing to back that claim up?

Yes, and I am willing to do so right here in this very thread. Feel free to ask any questions you would like to ask of me.

I think you actually need to explain your position, not just have people ask questions.

 

[KeepTalking]

Yes, and I am willing to do so right here in this very thread. Feel free to ask any questions you would like to ask of me.

I think you actually need to explain your position, not just have people ask questions.

I have already explained my position at length in this thread. Please read what is already posted, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask. This forum is for discussion, that is why I posted in this thread, and if I did not plan to engage in discussion that backs up the words that I type, I would not have typed those words.

 

[JonA]

Willing to back that claim up?

Yes, and I am willing to do so right here in this very thread. Feel free to ask any questions you would like to ask of me.

This thread is about "liberals" deferring to "religious nonsense".

If interested, I will start a thread in a more suitable forum specifically for discussing the feasibility of replacing fossil fuel energy sources to various degrees.

 

[untermensche]

Yes, and I am willing to do so right here in this very thread. Feel free to ask any questions you would like to ask of me.

This thread is about "liberals" deferring to "religious nonsense".

If interested, I will start a thread in a more suitable forum specifically for discussing the feasibility of replacing fossil fuel energy sources to various degrees.

The religion is the religion that if we do nothing we will somehow avoid the impending disaster.

God will take care of us.

 

[KeepTalking]

Yes, and I am willing to do so right here in this very thread. Feel free to ask any questions you would like to ask of me.

This thread is about "liberals" deferring to "religious nonsense".

If interested, I will start a thread in a more suitable forum specifically for discussing the feasibility of replacing fossil fuel energy sources to various degrees.

I don't know why you keep asking people about this. If you want to start or continue a discussion on any topic, you don't need to consult anyone else, just do it. If it is in one of the forums or sub-forums I tend to haunt, I will see it, and may participate. If you really want me to notice it, you can PM me, or throw a link into a response to one of my posts. Just remember, if you do start a thread that is intended to challenge the claim I made which prompted you to engage my post, that my claim was precisely this:

"We can reduce our reliance on coal and foreign oil without harming people and destroying the environment in the way that fracking does."

- - - Updated - - -

This thread is about "liberals" deferring to "religious nonsense".

If interested, I will start a thread in a more suitable forum specifically for discussing the feasibility of replacing fossil fuel energy sources to various degrees.

The religion is the religion that if we do nothing we will somehow avoid the impending disaster.

God will take care of us.

There also seems to be a smattering of that one religion that worships the almighty dollar: Republicanism.

 

[JonA]

This thread is about "liberals" deferring to "religious nonsense".

If interested, I will start a thread in a more suitable forum specifically for discussing the feasibility of replacing fossil fuel energy sources to various degrees.

I don't know why you keep asking people about this. If you want to start or continue a discussion on any topic, you don't need to consult anyone else, just do it.

It's a lot of work. If no one's going to participate, I ain't gonna do it.

But now I've done it.

The thread is here: Cutting Back :: Plans to Lessen Dependence on Fossil Fuels . There's quite a bit to it. I imagine we could easily spend ten to fifteen pages discussing each subpoint, so don't feel like you need to cram your responses into a single post (in fact, your contributions will probably be more meaningful if you don't).

** Note to those going from this thread to that: It's in the science forum and I am expecting science-level discussion.**

 

[arkirk]

Because Derec has chosen to loudmouth us all with his hate language and he has gotten carried away in his rants we have failed to answer the question asked in the OP. I think there is something here us ultra modern dip shits have forgotten. It is the concept of respecting nature and recognizing we are a product of nature and not the other way around. Native Americans seem to have a pretty good handle on that. We do not and we are continually ruining ecosystems by a variety of industrial means and answering those who are concerned with abject unapologetic disrespect. In fact, for this madness to continue, a cottage industry has grown up around the denial of pollution and indeed any of its feedbacks to our society. We have whole catechisms of untruthful information thrown at us from industry think tanks and it pervades our entire society with lies and derision of those not accepting those lies. Derek seems to identify with these liars and cheats. That is his place in this.

Nobody has all the answers, but enough of us have enough answers we are able at times to recognize unsustainable activities. Some real good examples are to be found in the destructive activities of the petroleum industry and mining industry and today, in industrial farming as well. Native Americans have a lot of allegorical tales to help them understand we are part of and a product of our environment...regardless of whether Derec understands it or not. Many of these tales advise us to have some respect for our environment and also for others.

I have been around quite awhile now (73 years) and have been in a lot of environmental fights in my life. One of the things that helps you know you are right is that your opponent dehumanizes you and accuses you of being not quite sane. Even if these things are true (and they are not), it would be at least be case of a pot calling the kettle black. The disrespect for natural systems and for fellow human beings seems to be the hallmark of the industrial age. So how can anyone get upset with an Indian who beats his drum and cries because he sees you destroying his world and his way of staying alive. Oil and Coal are ON THE WAY OUT! They both are too polluting. We can transform our energy system if we do it in an intelligent and timely manner. The trouble with the oil and coal people is that they will only have it one way...the oil and coal way. That aspect of their competition will in the end destroy those industries and possibly us along with them.

True Progressives are HUMANISTS and they extend to others a sound understanding of the meaning of HUMAN RIGHTS. There is no right to frack or to bomb Iraq or pollute the air or water or land. These acts are crimes against humanity and the environment. There is no magical enlightenment that makes these crimes less criminal and those who support these crimes are always finding their jobs become insulting and demeaning and destroying the environment and its people.

 

[JonA]

Because Derek has chosen to loudmouth us all with his hate language and he has gotten carried away in his rants we have failed to answer the question asked in the OP. I think there is something here us ultra modern dip shits have forgotten. It is the concept of respecting nature and recognizing we are a product of nature and not the other way around. Native Americans seem to have a pretty good handle on that. We do not and we are continually ruining ecosystems by a variety of industrial means and answering those who are concerned with abject unapologetic disrespect. In fact, for this madness to continue, a cottage industry has grown up around the denial of pollution and indeed any of its feedbacks to our society. We have whole catechisms of untruthful information thrown at us from industry think tanks and it pervades our entire society with lies and derision of those not accepting those lies. Derek seems to identify with these liars and cheats. That is his place in this.

Nobody has all the answers, but enough of us have enough answers we are able at times to recognize unsustainable activities. Some real good examples are to be found in the destructive activities of the petroleum industry and mining industry and today, in industrial farming as well. Native Americans have a lot of allegorical tales to help them understand we are part of and a product of our environment...regardless of whether Derek understands it or not. Many of these tales advise us to have some respect for our environment and also for others.

I have been around quite awhile now (73 years) and have been in a lot of environmental fights in my life. One of the things that helps you know you are right is that your opponent dehumanizes you and accuses you of being not quite sane. Even if these things are true (and they are not), it would be a case of a pot calling the kettle black. The disrespect for natural systems and for fellow human beings seems to be the hallmark of the industrial age. So how can anyone get upset with an Indian who beats his drum and cries because he sees you destroying his world and his way of staying alive.

True Progressives are HUMANISTS and they extend to others a sound understanding of the meaning of HUMAN RIGHTS. There is no right to frack or to bomb Iraq or pollute the air or water or land. These acts are crimes against humanity and the environment. There is no magical enlightenment that makes these crimes less criminal and those who support these crimes are always finding their jobs become insulting and demeaning and destroying the environment and its people.

What? No red font?

You feeling okay?

 

[abaddon]

Because Derec has chosen to loudmouth us all with his hate language and he has gotten carried away in his rants we have failed to answer the question asked in the OP. I think there is something here us ultra modern dip shits have forgotten. It is the concept of respecting nature and recognizing we are a product of nature and not the other way around. Native Americans seem to have a pretty good handle on that. We do not and we are continually ruining ecosystems by a variety of industrial means and answering those who are concerned with abject unapologetic disrespect. In fact, for this madness to continue, a cottage industry has grown up around the denial of pollution and indeed any of its feedbacks to our society. We have whole catechisms of untruthful information thrown at us from industry think tanks and it pervades our entire society with lies and derision of those not accepting those lies. Derek seems to identify with these liars and cheats. That is his place in this.

Nobody has all the answers, but enough of us have enough answers we are able at times to recognize unsustainable activities. Some real good examples are to be found in the destructive activities of the petroleum industry and mining industry and today, in industrial farming as well. Native Americans have a lot of allegorical tales to help them understand we are part of and a product of our environment...regardless of whether Derec understands it or not. Many of these tales advise us to have some respect for our environment and also for others.

I have been around quite awhile now (73 years) and have been in a lot of environmental fights in my life. One of the things that helps you know you are right is that your opponent dehumanizes you and accuses you of being not quite sane. Even if these things are true (and they are not), it would be at least be case of a pot calling the kettle black. The disrespect for natural systems and for fellow human beings seems to be the hallmark of the industrial age. So how can anyone get upset with an Indian who beats his drum and cries because he sees you destroying his world and his way of staying alive. Oil and Coal are ON THE WAY OUT! They both are too polluting. We can transform our energy system if we do it in an intelligent and timely manner. The trouble with the oil and coal people is that they will only have it one way...the oil and coal way. That aspect of their competition will in the end destroy those industries and possibly us along with them.

True Progressives are HUMANISTS and they extend to others a sound understanding of the meaning of HUMAN RIGHTS. There is no right to frack or to bomb Iraq or pollute the air or water or land. These acts are crimes against humanity and the environment. There is no magical enlightenment that makes these crimes less criminal and those who support these crimes are always finding their jobs become insulting and demeaning and destroying the environment and its people.

Yes. The ones who will think you're an "ecomentalist" will also likely recognize climate change is real but push for more oil at the same time. Which is as “mental” as anyone can get.

If alternative energy cannot sustain our lifestyles, it means our lifestyles are not sustainable. It’s not even a loss if we lived more simply than we do.

 

[KeepTalking]

I don't know why you keep asking people about this. If you want to start or continue a discussion on any topic, you don't need to consult anyone else, just do it.

It's a lot of work. If no one's going to participate, I ain't gonna do it.

But now I've done it.

The thread is here: Cutting Back :: Plans to Lessen Dependence on Fossil Fuels . There's quite a bit to it. I imagine we could easily spend ten to fifteen pages discussing each subpoint, so don't feel like you need to cram your responses into a single post (in fact, your contributions will probably be more meaningful if you don't).

** Note to those going from this thread to that: It's in the science forum and I am expecting science-level discussion.**

Well, I went over there and left a reply, but I think I broke the thread with my brilliance.

 

[bleubird]

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwo...early-3000-miles-support-standing-rock-165685
And,there are very few Indians in Alaska.

ETA:Yes,Alaska gets most of it's money from oil.

 

[JonA]

It's a lot of work. If no one's going to participate, I ain't gonna do it.

But now I've done it.

The thread is here: Cutting Back :: Plans to Lessen Dependence on Fossil Fuels . There's quite a bit to it. I imagine we could easily spend ten to fifteen pages discussing each subpoint, so don't feel like you need to cram your responses into a single post (in fact, your contributions will probably be more meaningful if you don't).

** Note to those going from this thread to that: It's in the science forum and I am expecting science-level discussion.**

Well, I went over there and left a reply, but I think I broke the thread with my brilliance.

You broke it 'cause you code like a toddler.

But I saw enough: you're response makes clear you're not interested in actually supporting the claim you made.

It's too bad.

 

[bleubird]

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwo...t-canoe-makes-maiden-voyage-smithsonian-79859

 

[Arctish]

I don't know why you keep asking people about this. If you want to start or continue a discussion on any topic, you don't need to consult anyone else, just do it.

It's a lot of work. If no one's going to participate, I ain't gonna do it.

But now I've done it.

The thread is here: Cutting Back :: Plans to Lessen Dependence on Fossil Fuels . There's quite a bit to it. I imagine we could easily spend ten to fifteen pages discussing each subpoint, so don't feel like you need to cram your responses into a single post (in fact, your contributions will probably be more meaningful if you don't).

** Note to those going from this thread to that: It's in the science forum and I am expecting science-level discussion.**

Well, I went over there and left a reply, but I think I broke the thread with my brilliance.

You broke it 'cause you code like a toddler.

But I saw enough: you're response makes clear you're not interested in actually supporting the claim you made.

It's too bad.

Well, if you ever get it fixed, you could post this there: Powering Down in Juneau

When an avalanche damaged a major electrical power line near Juneau, Alaska, on April 16, life abruptly changed for the town’s 30,000 inhabitants. The line had carried inexpensive hydroelectric power that supplied 85 percent of the Alaskan state capital’s electricity needs.

The line runs along the foot of a mountain that is often covered in snow in the winter and the local power utility, the Alaska Electric Light and Power company, had long been aware of its vulnerability. A bank of diesel-powered generators was waiting to step in during the emergency.

However, a big problem still remained for the town’s inhabitants: with the price of diesel fuel at historic highs, everyone was going to see their monthly electricity bill jump by as much as five times.

In a state where the cost of living is already considerably higher than it is in the lower 48 states, the unexpected jump in cost was going to be a major burden to all, especially to lower income townspeople, who were already living close to the financial edge. Finding rapid ways to reduce electricity use suddenly became just about everyone’s top priority.

How do you save electricity in a hurry? One way to do it is to call in Berkeley Lab scientist Alan Meier, who wrote the book Saving Electricity in a Hurry while on leave to the International Energy Agency....


...His brief visit of less than three days contributed to a substantial change. “Even before I arrived,” he says, “Juneau had already reduced its electricity use by about 20 percent. Now its electricity use is down 40 percent compared with before the avalanche.” Says Meier, “This is the largest saving in electricity use that I have ever seen.”

Summing up his advice, he says, “We had to make it more than just socially acceptable to conserve energy — we had to suggest that conservation was expected. We had to communicate the message that to be a good citizen you need to conserve energy.” That the message got through is seen in many small ways throughout town, for example in the restaurants and other businesses whose signs proclaim “Our lights are off — we’re doing our part to save electricity.”

 

[bleubird]

I don't know why you keep asking people about this. If you want to start or continue a discussion on any topic, you don't need to consult anyone else, just do it.

It's a lot of work. If no one's going to participate, I ain't gonna do it.

But now I've done it.

The thread is here: Cutting Back :: Plans to Lessen Dependence on Fossil Fuels . There's quite a bit to it. I imagine we could easily spend ten to fifteen pages discussing each subpoint, so don't feel like you need to cram your responses into a single post (in fact, your contributions will probably be more meaningful if you don't).

** Note to those going from this thread to that: It's in the science forum and I am expecting science-level discussion.**

Well, I went over there and left a reply, but I think I broke the thread with my brilliance.

You broke it 'cause you code like a toddler.

But I saw enough: you're response makes clear you're not interested in actually supporting the claim you made.

It's too bad.

Well, if you ever get it fixed, you could post this there: Powering Down in Juneau

When an avalanche damaged a major electrical power line near Juneau, Alaska, on April 16, life abruptly changed for the town’s 30,000 inhabitants. The line had carried inexpensive hydroelectric power that supplied 85 percent of the Alaskan state capital’s electricity needs.

The line runs along the foot of a mountain that is often covered in snow in the winter and the local power utility, the Alaska Electric Light and Power company, had long been aware of its vulnerability. A bank of diesel-powered generators was waiting to step in during the emergency.

However, a big problem still remained for the town’s inhabitants: with the price of diesel fuel at historic highs, everyone was going to see their monthly electricity bill jump by as much as five times.

In a state where the cost of living is already considerably higher than it is in the lower 48 states, the unexpected jump in cost was going to be a major burden to all, especially to lower income townspeople, who were already living close to the financial edge. Finding rapid ways to reduce electricity use suddenly became just about everyone’s top priority.

How do you save electricity in a hurry? One way to do it is to call in Berkeley Lab scientist Alan Meier, who wrote the book Saving Electricity in a Hurry while on leave to the International Energy Agency....


...His brief visit of less than three days contributed to a substantial change. “Even before I arrived,” he says, “Juneau had already reduced its electricity use by about 20 percent. Now its electricity use is down 40 percent compared with before the avalanche.” Says Meier, “This is the largest saving in electricity use that I have ever seen.”

Summing up his advice, he says, “We had to make it more than just socially acceptable to conserve energy — we had to suggest that conservation was expected. We had to communicate the message that to be a good citizen you need to conserve energy.” That the message got through is seen in many small ways throughout town, for example in the restaurants and other businesses whose signs proclaim “Our lights are off — we’re doing our part to save electricity.”

That was a great time to live here.My family wonders why stay here,go figure.

 

[JonA]

I don't know why you keep asking people about this. If you want to start or continue a discussion on any topic, you don't need to consult anyone else, just do it.

It's a lot of work. If no one's going to participate, I ain't gonna do it.

But now I've done it.

The thread is here: Cutting Back :: Plans to Lessen Dependence on Fossil Fuels . There's quite a bit to it. I imagine we could easily spend ten to fifteen pages discussing each subpoint, so don't feel like you need to cram your responses into a single post (in fact, your contributions will probably be more meaningful if you don't).

** Note to those going from this thread to that: It's in the science forum and I am expecting science-level discussion.**

Well, I went over there and left a reply, but I think I broke the thread with my brilliance.

You broke it 'cause you code like a toddler.

But I saw enough: you're response makes clear you're not interested in actually supporting the claim you made.

It's too bad.

Well, if you ever get it fixed,...

I can't edit others' posts. KeepTalking will have to fix it. I also reported it to the moderators if they manage to see it and clean it up first.

you could post this there: Powering Down in Juneau

When an avalanche damaged a major electrical power line near Juneau, Alaska, on April 16, life abruptly changed for the town’s 30,000 inhabitants. The line had carried inexpensive hydroelectric power that supplied 85 percent of the Alaskan state capital’s electricity needs.

The line runs along the foot of a mountain that is often covered in snow in the winter and the local power utility, the Alaska Electric Light and Power company, had long been aware of its vulnerability. A bank of diesel-powered generators was waiting to step in during the emergency.

However, a big problem still remained for the town’s inhabitants: with the price of diesel fuel at historic highs, everyone was going to see their monthly electricity bill jump by as much as five times.

In a state where the cost of living is already considerably higher than it is in the lower 48 states, the unexpected jump in cost was going to be a major burden to all, especially to lower income townspeople, who were already living close to the financial edge. Finding rapid ways to reduce electricity use suddenly became just about everyone’s top priority.

How do you save electricity in a hurry? One way to do it is to call in Berkeley Lab scientist Alan Meier, who wrote the book Saving Electricity in a Hurry while on leave to the International Energy Agency....


...His brief visit of less than three days contributed to a substantial change. “Even before I arrived,” he says, “Juneau had already reduced its electricity use by about 20 percent. Now its electricity use is down 40 percent compared with before the avalanche.” Says Meier, “This is the largest saving in electricity use that I have ever seen.”

Summing up his advice, he says, “We had to make it more than just socially acceptable to conserve energy — we had to suggest that conservation was expected. We had to communicate the message that to be a good citizen you need to conserve energy.” That the message got through is seen in many small ways throughout town, for example in the restaurants and other businesses whose signs proclaim “Our lights are off — we’re doing our part to save electricity.”

While interesting, that account is not technical enough. We need the numbers behind the incident if we want to assess its applicability to larger society.

 

[KeepTalking]

Well, I went over there and left a reply, but I think I broke the thread with my brilliance.

You broke it 'cause you code like a toddler.

You call what we do here coding? Spoken like a true script-kiddie.

I make a living writing code, and a good one at that. I will put my Java up against yours any day of the week. Moving quote tags around in the quick reply window should never be able to cause an issue with the thread itself. I suspect there is a bug with the way quote tags and list tags interact.

But I saw enough: you're response makes clear you're not interested in actually supporting the claim you made.

It's too bad.

My response makes it clear that I am not going to dance to your tune, but I am perfectly willing to support the claim I made. I have already provided much of that support in this thread. Derec tried to rebut it, but was unable to do anything other than pick nits, and ultimately bolstered my argument with at least one of the links he provided. Feel free to try to do better if you think you can. Please note, this is not an academic journal, it is a discussion board. I am a programmer, not a geologist, nor am I a climatologist. If you want to provide a multi page technical treatise for each and every point you want to make in discussing this issue, knock yourself out, but don't expect it from me. I will more likely provide a short and concise opinion, backed up by links from sources with more expertise than I in the relevant fields of study.