Exactly. It's all about consumer forcing. If the majority of people want their electricity (for example) entirely from clean energy sources, there is more pressure on the providers to provide that service. I get all my electricity from clean energy sources, it's not much more expensive - do you? If everyone does the same then all electricity production will come from clean sources remarkably quickly. It's all about supply and demand - if there's enough demand, the supply will increase to meet it.Varegg wrote:
Correct and also wrong at the same time, consumer emitted emissions is the cheapest place to start and if enough people do whatever they can that itself is possibly enough to make a difference, the industry will be way more exspensive and take a longer time to be done with their nesesary steps but then it will yield a bigger effect !Bubbalo wrote:
Except that it isn't a matter of getting a hybrid car. Sure, you could choose a more fuel efficient car (which saves you money anyway), but far more important is getting people involved to force the government to act. The biggest issue is industry, not consumer.lowing wrote:
I don't have a problem with the message, but he is the one of the few that can actually afford a hybrid car, or fly anywhere he wants, when he wants on a commercial airplane. Yet he preaches what the rest of us should do, as he does the opposite.
We only have electricity from clean sources in Norway so i have no choice in the matter
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Nothing too hard here to do for the average human being, like I said can't do any harm now can it, even if you think gobal warming is bollocks.
I have been told this since the 80's, it is nothing new. I do most of that stuff by the way. Haven't changed the bulbs yet.
What is it that scares people who don't believe this science so much? Is it the man giving the message or the message itself? You attack A Gore for his use of energy, yet what are you doing to prevent global warming? Or don't you believe the Co2 levels have risen drastically and there is an adverse effect due to the sun's warmth being trapped in our atmosphere? Here is a simple small scenario that is true. The bark beetle attacks conifer trees for food. The cold weather use to kill off the bark beetle to keep it's population in check. The population of the bark beetle has risen so high that it now attacks elm and aspen trees. Trees produce oxygen. You should be able to fill in the rest yourselves.
Bottom line, his message would be taken more seriously and looked upon as sincere, if he himself, would "get the ball rolling" by practicing what he preaches and show us all just how easy it is.Bubbalo wrote:
Except that it isn't a matter of getting a hybrid car. Sure, you could choose a more fuel efficient car (which saves you money anyway), but far more important is getting people involved to force the government to act. The biggest issue is industry, not consumer.lowing wrote:
I don't have a problem with the message, but he is the one of the few that can actually afford a hybrid car, or fly anywhere he wants, when he wants on a commercial airplane. Yet he preaches what the rest of us should do, as he does the opposite.HunterOfSkulls wrote:
I'd have to agree. Sometimes I think Gore is too much of a polarizing point for people who want to continue to claim that global warming is just a plot concocted by America-hating lefties and "eco-nazis".
Well, I agree with this guy to the extent that the War on Terror is just as much a waste of money as he's saying fighting Global Warming is.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Found this. Thought Id add it to this thread.
"The Real Inconvenient Truth"
I dont share this guys opinion by the way. Just thought he was funny.
Hell, why don't we just keep as much of our money as possible, minimize taxes, and minimize government? That would provide each of us the most freedom, wouldn't it? This includes less warfare and interventionism as well.
...where do you plant the tree if you live in a city?paranoid101 wrote:
Nothing too hard here to do for the average human being, like I said can't do any harm now can it, even if you think gobal warming is bollocks.
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/4433 … 4f7wu7.jpg
In the ground.sfarrar33 wrote:
...where do you plant the tree if you live in a city?paranoid101 wrote:
Nothing too hard here to do for the average human being, like I said can't do any harm now can it, even if you think gobal warming is bollocks.
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/4433 … 4f7wu7.jpg
That's usually best.
Once again. How many trees must I plant to offset this
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/27/D8NIGG3O0.html
You expect me to listen to this Dickhole? Screw Manbearpig!
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/27/D8NIGG3O0.html
You expect me to listen to this Dickhole? Screw Manbearpig!
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
lol through the tarmac and concrete?Bertster7 wrote:
In the ground.sfarrar33 wrote:
...where do you plant the tree if you live in a city?paranoid101 wrote:
Nothing too hard here to do for the average human being, like I said can't do any harm now can it, even if you think gobal warming is bollocks.
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/4433 … 4f7wu7.jpg
That's usually best.
or just out of the flat window so it kills someone below me?
It's a common misconception that carbon offsetting is all about planting trees. It's not.DBBrinson1 wrote:
Once again. How many trees must I plant to offset this
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/27/D8NIGG3O0.html
You expect me to listen to this Dickhole? Screw Manbearpig!
But offsetting is a last resort, it's what you do to make up for the emissions it's impractical to reduce.
The fact that Gore uses that much power, not to mention the emissions from his extravagant jetting around in private planes is disgustingly hypocritical. The man's a prick - I thought so before I saw the film, I thought so while I watched the film and I think so even more now - but I do still rate the film and its message very highly.
Kudos to Gore for raising awareness, but he's still a cunt and I'm super, super cereal about that.
Either way is good. I live in London and have managed to plant trees (granted I have a slight advantage because my brother is a tree surgeon - also living in London).sfarrar33 wrote:
lol through the tarmac and concrete?Bertster7 wrote:
In the ground.sfarrar33 wrote:
...where do you plant the tree if you live in a city?
That's usually best.
or just out of the flat window so it kills someone below me?
I know where you can plant one...................Bertster7 wrote:
Either way is good. I live in London and have managed to plant trees (granted I have a slight advantage because my brother is a tree surgeon - also living in London).sfarrar33 wrote:
lol through the tarmac and concrete?Bertster7 wrote:
In the ground.
That's usually best.
or just out of the flat window so it kills someone below me?
Anyway, most cities have trees planted everywhere they can.
cereal? (at the other post wherever that is)Bertster7 wrote:
Either way is good. I live in London and have managed to plant trees (granted I have a slight advantage because my brother is a tree surgeon - also living in London).sfarrar33 wrote:
lol through the tarmac and concrete?Bertster7 wrote:
In the ground.
That's usually best.
or just out of the flat window so it kills someone below me?
i used to live in wakefield
the only green space i managed to find was private and therefore illigal for me to tamper with
much nicer with stanwick lakes just around the corner
and farmers who are anti-wind farms...
anyone who is against wind farms should have a giant nuclear power plant built on their village/town/city...
Super Cereal.sfarrar33 wrote:
cereal? (at the other post wherever that is)Bertster7 wrote:
Either way is good. I live in London and have managed to plant trees (granted I have a slight advantage because my brother is a tree surgeon - also living in London).sfarrar33 wrote:
lol through the tarmac and concrete?
or just out of the flat window so it kills someone below me?
i used to live in wakefield
the only green space i managed to find was private and therefore illigal for me to tamper with
much nicer with stanwick lakes just around the corner
and farmers who are anti-wind farms...
anyone who is against wind farms should have a giant nuclear power plant built on their village/town/city...
Admitedly I make it sound like I've planted loads of trees, when actually I've only planted 2, but hey.
I don't see what the problem is with windfarms, but farmers get pissed off at anything. Coming over here, stealing our wind.....
Sorry, it's there so I'm commenting..lolTurquoise wrote:
Well, I agree with this guy to the extent that the War on Terror is just as much a waste of money as he's saying fighting Global Warming is.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Found this. Thought Id add it to this thread.
"The Real Inconvenient Truth"
I dont share this guys opinion by the way. Just thought he was funny.
Hell, why don't we just keep as much of our money as possible, minimize taxes, and minimize government? That would provide each of us the most freedom, wouldn't it? This includes less warfare and interventionism as well.
First he states that the scientist are trying to tell us that the temperature will rise "several degrees over the next century". This is inaccurate, they are talking about 1 degree average over the entire globe.
He says, "they want us to adopt extraordinary expensive measure today". Once again inaccurate, they want us to: a) Acknowledge we are impacting the earths climate b) Start taking the small steps like changing light bulbs and just being more energy conscious.
The question he ask is "won't the children of the future be in a better position to change the climate than we will be today?" He is dealing in assumptions. What we do know is that climate change takes a great bit of time to show the impact of our actions. The sooner we get to work the sooner we can see results.
He then ridicules the governments performance and again assumes failure. This is a losers attitude in my opinion. Recognizing a problem and refusing to try.
Finally he proceeds to complain about the money to be spent. On one hand you could have a great bit of money, on the other hand you have the PLANET. Tough decision.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-28 16:46:03)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
then how do you know this isnt the first time in history in which the earth will naturally do this? you dont.Bubbalo wrote:
And it's also known that the temperature a couple hundred million years ago was part of a natural trend, which we aren't in due to human interference.
Of course there has been trends of warming and cooling prior to humans. The point is we don't want to encourage it either way which is precisely what we are doing.azza2 wrote:
then how do you know this isnt the first time in history in which the earth will naturally do this? you dont.Bubbalo wrote:
And it's also known that the temperature a couple hundred million years ago was part of a natural trend, which we aren't in due to human interference.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Good counterpoints, and yeah, I think this guy was a loser too.Kmarion wrote:
Sorry, it's there so I'm commenting..lolTurquoise wrote:
Well, I agree with this guy to the extent that the War on Terror is just as much a waste of money as he's saying fighting Global Warming is.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Found this. Thought Id add it to this thread.
"The Real Inconvenient Truth"
I dont share this guys opinion by the way. Just thought he was funny.
Hell, why don't we just keep as much of our money as possible, minimize taxes, and minimize government? That would provide each of us the most freedom, wouldn't it? This includes less warfare and interventionism as well.
First he states that the scientist are trying to tell us that the temperature will rise "several degrees over the next century". This is inaccurate, they are talking about 1 degree average over the entire globe.
He says, "they want us to adopt extraordinary expensive measure today". Once again inaccurate, they want us to: a) Acknowledge we are impacting the earths climate b) Start taking the small steps like changing light bulbs and just being more energy conscious.
The question he ask is "won't the children of the future be in a better position to change the climate than we will be today?" He is dealing in assumptions. What we do know is that climate change takes a great bit of time to show the impact of our actions. The sooner we get to work the sooner we can see results.
He then ridicules the governments performance and again assumes failure. This is a losers attitude in my opinion. Recognizing a problem and refusing to try.
Finally he proceed to complain about the money to be spent. On one hand you could have a great bit of money, on the other hand you have the PLANET. Tough decision.
The strongest part of your post was where you mentioned how dealing with global warming is something that takes a long time. He definitely missed that part of the analysis on the issue. Unfortunately, his lack of foresight is typical among many people.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
look to canada for the answer
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070228/wl … 0228180440
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070228/wl … 0228180440
As long as what you eat is Kosher....sure.usmarine2007 wrote:
So if I made a documentary about the disgusting way animals are killed and processed for human consumption, yet continue to eat hamburgers and steak, I deserve respect?Varegg wrote:
Al Gore have done more that enough with his work in this field for a bloody amount of years and he started his interest about the issue way before it became popular to do so, that's enough for anyone to show some respect and credit for his work !
Be careful when you use the word factBubbalo wrote:
Because that falls into a cycle which our current rise doesn't fit.Blehm98 wrote:
how do you know that it is due to human interference? What if the temperature is just on the rise again like it is naturally?
That and the fact that they know the effect of air pollutants on temperature.
Fact implies that ALL competent observers agree on the hypothesis and conclusion. Otherwise its just a majorities belief.
Here is an answer that will help everyone..... that can afford it. 0 to 60 in 4 sec. top speed of 130 mph. 250 mile cruising range. All electric.
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog1/index.php?js_enabled=1
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog1/index.php?js_enabled=1