when being green isn’t

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, you’re lying. The goal was being carbon neutral in 10 year. Didn’t say everyone would be dead 10 years. 😂😂😂

Thanks for getting yet another thread locked though because you can’t read the forum rules.


I heard the same thing as well, repeated by a number of well known people. Their numbers vary but their intent was to tell us we are approaching the point of no return.

A lot of these same people told us that NYC would be buried under a sheet of ice as a new Ice Age was coming by the year 2000.


Society wants change to happen gradually not this disruptive style that is the big thing now.
 
The problem is going Green here, wherever on the planet one's "here" may be, is being implemented by moving the pollution and environmental poisons to "not here". Air moves, water flows, the poisons aren't going to stay out of sight forever. Moving battery and electronic manufacturing to China just guarantees that coal is being burned over there.
"Not in my backyard" just doesn't work in the long game.
Kind of like a pop star flying a Prius from Japan to England to show everyone he's environmentally aware, proponents of Green being limo'd to the Capital building in gas guzzlers, or flying a minimum of three jumbo jets 3k miles to give a speech on the environment.
Someone feels better, I guess. But kids "not here" are getting poisoned and that air and water is going to eventually poison the kids "here".
 
I heard the same thing as well, repeated by a number of well known people. Their numbers vary but their intent was to tell us we are approaching the point of no return.

A lot of these same people told us that NYC would be buried under a sheet of ice as a new Ice Age was coming by the year 2000.


Society wants change to happen gradually not this disruptive style that is the big thing now.
And let's not forget Jimmy The Great, and his now famous prediction that we would run out of oil by 2011. And back then coal was the GREAT saviour! Now talk about coal to a leftist.

 
And let us not forget how rising sea levels are going to wipe out out coastlines, and sink thousands of miles of beaches.

vX6RG0R.jpg
 
No, you’re lying. The goal was being carbon neutral in 10 year. Didn’t say everyone would be dead 10 years. 😂😂😂

Thanks for getting yet another thread locked though because you can’t read the forum rules.

Well, to be carbon neutral, we have to die or the population have to be reduced since most of those carbon are created by human breathing "air".
 
Here is another one of Jimmy's Gems from 1977, (45 years ago). Notice the gloom and doom overtones. Some things never change.

"Just to keep up with current consumption, we're going to need another Texas every year. Another Alaska North Slope every 9 months. Another Saudi Arabia every 3 years".

And yet somehow we were energy independant less than 2 years ago. Fast forward to today and nothing has changed....

Where do they cook up this ridiculous crap? Now we're all going to die!!..... Again!

 
Last time I checked, a month ago, the US "exported" more oil than it "imported". The US owns zero oil production. The big oil companies own them. They control them. Stock market controls the price of oil. Yes the President can lobby the OPEC nations to open or close the oil taps, but if they say no, it's no. Global market and the US is caught up in it.
Our refineries are tuned for a particular flavor of crude oil as are theirs. It's actually more efficient to trade everything all around vs forcing every drop of "our" oil through "our" processors. It's also a great uniter and makes potential world wars really sticky problems.

And we'd be in a stronger position if we as a country sent less money to China for (non-petroleum) junk. When they have dollars, they get our oil... and real estate.
 
I am glad we have some push for an alternate. The best tech for future will shake out . Politics ruins it both ways to much for or against.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top