<p>“I don’t care if it rains or freezes, ‘long as I got my exegesis, ridin’ on the dashboard of my car…”</p>
<p>Tragedy of the commons.</p>
<p>College-ish, about now all the people who feel that Ayn Rand wannabes are just sort of looking the other way, humming… and trying to figure out a way to change the subject.</p>
<p>“And when Senor Satan sneezes on my global warming thesis
My Pilot guides through fire, quakes and tar,…”</p>
<p>“Jose, can you si?”</p>
<p>(If they were aiming it at Hispanics, why didn’t they write the whole thing in Spanish?)</p>
<p>by the Don’s surly light</p>
<p>A lot more entertaining than do gooders looking for a cause.</p>
<p>who ya callin’ a do-gooder, Pilgrim?</p>
<p>Not you, Marion.</p>
<p>Ole’ MacBush had a farm…</p>
<p>and on this farm they had a passive-solar house built of native limestone. e i e i o</p>
<p>You’re weirdooooo.</p>
<p>Can we get this thread back on track, please?</p>
<p>Concerning alternative energy, you can be sure that none will be widely developed or adopted that will negatively impact the State/Federal revenue income or the Corporate windfall that’s currently generated by the massive consumption of oil and gas.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>words on the page can seem so neutral in tone without the benefit of vocal expressiveness, a vague outline to which you must supply your moody color. You might cast this fellow’s request in “scolding librarian” if that is how you recall such requests to get serious. If you remember someone encouraging you to amend an odd habit for the sake of the human family,…well, I really can’t think of another way to qualify this plea. So, compost buckets,…</p>
<p>Ok, I thought it had been determined by the eclectically-enlightened (Vp Gore and his posse, for instance) that there was no “Truth,” inconvenient or otherwise; the old-fashioned canard being something of an inconvenience to progressive punditry and social-action the sand in the Vaseline of the liberal go-getter.</p>
<p>A liberating thaw? A chink in the armor? What gives?</p>
<p>Hollywood-Gore…in the house; hugs-it-out and now all’s forgiven with Tipper and that whole misguided PMRC thing: Celebrity-pragmatists, I presume.</p>
<p>So, FS, is there global warming or not? Or are you in the deny science camp once again</p>
<p>I’m an 18yr old freshman (just finished my first year, this week). I don’t currently know whether or not we, as civilized human beings, are responsible for global warming. It seems to me an open question, worthy of our attention but with no specific conclusions as yet reached…or, as they say, no “Truth.”</p>
<p>It may be true, if you believe in that sort of thingTRUTH.</p>
<p>But you, with your training and knowledge of the subject, are more than welcome to prove it to one and all…+ me, right here. Give us the TRUTH.</p>
<p>
Spoken like a true theologian CGM.;)</p>
<p>Debating if global warming exists or not -or if mankind is the main culprit- is mostly a waste of time. Scientists who have spent their life analyzing the date with a lot more knowledge than most of us have on the subject have been arguing the finer points and … changed camps. </p>
<p>However, the symptoms of egregious behavior by man are easy to spot. The impact of industrial pollution are very visible in cities such as LA, Mexico City, or the Polish Krakow, where the (ab)use of coal-based energy generation created an alarming rise in pulmonary disease among children. </p>
<p>The debate about global warming has had the negative effect of distracting from existing problem for which we DO have solutions’ solutions that usually require some investment and a bit more money. For instance, generating electricity through the combustion of carbon is not necessarily evil, but doing it without adequate scrubbing and pollution controls is. </p>
<p>In so many words, we CAN do better and do it today. However, it will and SHOULD cost us a bit more. As a country, we are enamored with Wal-Mart and its supply of cheap goods. When it comes to the future of our planet, and our own survival, we should not skimp on the investing side, and accept that cleaner technologies might cost more in the short term. Surprisingly, when making long term analyses, “expensive” technologies often cost less than what we use currently: wind energy is such animal. We also have to accept that newer technologies might look a bit different and accept that they’d be built in our backyard or have a somewhat negative impact of fauna or flora. “Command and control” environmentalists have caused a benign industry such as the wind energy one to spend millions in environmental impact studies for the protection of a few feathered friends. Maybe a lofty cause for some but still one that wastes resources that could better used somewhere else. And the list goes on! </p>
<p>If the cost of gasoline remains in the $3.00 range, one could expect choices to develop, and a LOT more if the costs climb to $5.00 per gallon. It is a given that ultimately we will witness prices exhorbitant for us -but a bargain for European motorists. The sad part is that more could be done BEFORE the current crisis becomes a long-term reality. By paying a bit more today, we will save considerably more in the future. Iinvesting and spending both require cash outlays; the difference is that one pays dividends. </p>
<p>Too bad that the US consumer only see low proces as an excuse to spend more.</p>
<p>Bravo Xiggi.</p>
<p>We are a soceity that loves consumption to excess. And yeppers, those Wal-Mart cheapie trinkets, manufactured in China, are sure a lure for a lot of people, it seems.</p>
<p>It won’t bother me in the slightest if gas goes to $6 a gallon. My DH takes public transporation, I walk to work (with the exception of a couple times a month where I have to drive to a meeting), and my children walk to school. Increasing gas prices won’t affect me that much at all, but perhaps it will force other people to reevaluate their dependence on the automobile, or at least the type of car they are driving and the distance they drive per day.</p>