Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bill Mocarsky

Five Myths About Suburbia And Driving

59 posts in this topic


I don't think I totally buy into this global warming phenomenon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point about cars and wealth. That's why public transportation is so important, it gives poor folks a chance to travel for work. It gives them not only mobility but upward mobility as well.

Hey, I just made that up!!!! But it's a pretty nice way to frame the argument for public transportation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Listen, I'm not saying he is. But those who are know that global warming is real. There is no debate in the scientific community about it. None. The only debate is a political one. People who deny global warming are screaming ignorance. It's like when people deny evolution- saying it's just a theory. Give me a break. Although I often disagree with conservative political thought, I don't do so because I think conservatives are stupid. Quite the opposite. But some conservatives make themselves look stupid by saying things like "gee, I'm not sure if I really believe in global warming." It's like saying, they don't believe in photosynthesis or that smoking can cause cancer. You guys are smarter than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


4. We're paving over America. How much of the United States is developed? Twenty-five percent? Fifty? Seventy-five? How about 5.4 percent? That's the Census Bureau's figure. And even much of that is not exactly crowded: The bureau says that an area is "developed" when it has 30 or more people per square mile.

OUCH! LOL Damn, that's a statistic that should make a lot of people here stop in their tracks and think! Nah...it's not about truth for most drum beaters, just agenda. :shades:

Not a bad article. Can't say I agree with it all, but over all not bad. Thanks for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want to believe that you are descendant of a puddle of sludge and are cousin to a tadpole and that this earth has no rhyme reason or purpose and life is just chance, that's up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, where did that come from?

At any rate, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of hundreds of scientists from 113 countries, said that based on new research over the last six years, it is 90% certain that human-generated greenhouse gases account for most of the global rise in temperatures over the past half-century. The entire story can be found here. Also, the board of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on climate change recently issued a statement essentially saying the same thing. "The evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now and is a growing threat to society," the AAAS said at its annual meeting.

I'm not sure why we feel the need to politicize everything, but from my standpoint, I think the evidence is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to tell you man but not all scientists agree with this theory. Although that doesn't mean it isn't happening, I just think we need more proof than what's out there. No need to get testy man just because somebody doesn't completely agree with you. Lets keep it civil OK!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the hell does all this have to do with paving and suburbia? Let's keep this on topic guys....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What the hell does all this have to do with paving and suburbia? Let's keep this on topic guys....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Actually, the article does talk about global warming (point #5 in particular).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, so going through the history of global warming makes it on-topic? Also, explain where the intelligent design/evolution is mentioned....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please, drc and Hass, please name one of these independent and reputable scientists. Please. Please. Please. It is not me who diagrees with you, but the entire scientific community. See krazeeboi's post. Which is more arrogant, believing the consensus of experts- the very best in their field in the entire world- or "disagreeing" with the people who know because it might be politically inconvenient??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Inconvenient? How? lol I could care less if my car spews less emissions - fine with me. I could care less if we burn Ethanol - in fact I welcome it. But let me explain something to you. Whenever "your people" mention going "green" it always ends up just being some form of government control, policy, and/or tax which dictates THEIR will in my life that has nothing to do with global warming.

I.E. California. I owned a small aftermarket automotive performance parts manufacturing business which could not sell anything in the state of CA for street driven vehicles. (Personally I could care less it wasn't about sales but it's a good example) In California, you can not put anything on your car that is not CARB certified. No matter if the said part actually makes tailpipe emissions CLEANER. Aftermarket catalytic converter that works better than stock? Nope, sorry. Unless it's got a CARB cert you can't run it. No matter it makes cleaner air. Yes you heard that right, it's not about clean air - it's about the California Air Research Board dictating who gets what and why.

If it was about clean air, it shouldn't matter what I want to put on my car so long as it meets or exceeds the standards set forth for tailpipe emissions. Anything more is simply draconian socialism and control enforcing THEIR will onto the people not the other way around.

No thanks.

That is a real example you can take to the bank. No spin, I can promise you. If that's what "going green" gets because of extreme radicals who want me to live on flax seed oil in some kind of commune - no way.

So I guess we read different Bibles then because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there is a debate on global warming. What the scientists agree on is there is very likely global warming. The Unitied Nations report says that global warming is a virtual certainty. Instead of saying it was 100%, they left themselves an out. A small percentage but there it is.

So anyone who claims there is "no debate" is making a politcal statement. Personally, I believe the planet is always getting hotter or colder, so one or the other is happening.

The real questions are what roll do humans play in global climate and can humans effect global climate in any meaningful way.

China is building a coal fired energy plant every three days. They will be the biggest CO2 emmitter in two years. India will join them soon after. Both will dwarf the USA output of greenhouse gases in the next decade. Both India and China are exempt from Kyoto. So drive a hybrid if you want, it won't make any difference at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's interesting that you would take what sounds like ONE failed policy measure, and that completely exonerates everyone from adopting any kind of environmental stewardship into their lives. Even Bush's administration now admits that humans are the primary cause of global warming (climate change), so I believe the debate has pretty much shifted from "are we the cause", to "what can we do about it". There are very few holdouts any more, and the holdouts now have the burden of proof that it's not happening and not being caused by humans.

BTW: this article is syndicated from the Washington Post and is being discussed here already. It was written from two gentleman from the Reason Foundation, a Libertarian think tank (obviously far outside the realm of non-partisan).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That would be because that's ONE example. :shades:

I know my viewpoint isn't much welcome here and I am in the minority, but I won't change what I believe at my core just to "fit in". Sorry.

And I never said I was against environmental stewardship. You are putting words in my mouth. In fact I said just the opposite. I'm not against it. I just wish the radicals that chain themselves to trees would get out of the spotlight so we can find reasonable solutions outside of the political agendas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not how I read this sentence:

"But let me explain something to you. Whenever "your people" mention going "green" it always ends up just being some form of government control, policy, and/or tax which dictates THEIR will in my life that has nothing to do with global warming."

Who is your people? And why the condescension? It doesn't always end up being some form of control.

I do agree that are too many radicals getting the spotlight, and that most people in this country would embrace (and would make sacrifices for) cleaner air, cleaner water, and less dependence on fossil fuels if there were a reasoned and thoughtful debate on the issue.

I apologize for calling you out, but that statement bothered me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ahh, you secular progressives sure are a handful let me tell you!

You really should learn to accept that not everything YOU think is so, "certainly is". Just because you believe a certain political/social version of things doesn't mean there is not another side or that there can be "no debate". The mark of good science is the willingness to discuss the intelligent criticisms of a hypothesis. The refusal to consider and discuss intelligent criticism based upon facts and logic is the mark of group-think junk science.

Things like evolution and global warming are indeed theory at this point. People tend to agree with the scientific "backup" that they themselves believe. It's that simple really. But lets say for a moment the earth is warming - now you have the daunting task to see if it's natural or human caused and if it's NOT human caused what on earth can a bunch of fleas on a planet do to stop such great forces at work? After all the same scientists will tell you that the sun will eventually grow into a red giant and burn up the planet to vapor...but I digress.

Telling someone who believes in intelligent creation are "stupid" and "not enlightened" is a bit arrogant to say the least and you are pandering to your own self interests...but then again, I suppose that's just a human trait.

Anyway, I don't want to turn this into a political sewage post but your comments are extremely arrogant and frankly, self righteous to say the least. There are many Ph D's who would laugh at your comments.

If you want to believe that you are descendant of a puddle of sludge and are cousin to a tadpole and that this earth has no rhyme reason or purpose and life is just chance, that's up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.