View Single Post
Old 06-22-2011, 02:29 AM
Originally Posted by rocknblues81 View Post
Didn't I admit to my misinformation? Maybe you should give me a chance before completely writing me off.
I will not take back that I think Gore is a money loving bastard. But that goes for most politicians (right and left) methinks. Although I think the left side has a little more honesty.

While I don't know a lot about science it seems to me that Climatologist and the alike present a much more logical picture. My mistrust of political figures like Al Gore originally made me skeptical of Global Warming. But the evidence does look strong once you look past the obvious politics.
Al Gore kinda created a bandwagon, and whether or not his intentions were well spirited, as with many bandwagons there are those who are quick to jump on a lot of nonsense. They might not understand what is happening and have bad information, but are also on a vocal crusade.

On the other side, you have people arguing like we are impotent beings who are helpless to changes in the environment. Blah. The ice age will come and humans will be dead anyway.

My understanding is that while man may contribute to global climate change, we are not on the same page in regards to whether this events will become significant one, two or a hundred generations from now. There is even support to say that by the time it would happen, humans will be extinct and the process will work toward reversing, a process that alone could take generations to occur, or maybe it will happen instantly.

At the same time, I see no reason to not move in the direction of consumption/production of goods that will lessen the effect on the environment. I'm of the mindset of it ain't broke don't fix it, and there's a lot that can be fixed. Combustion motors are inefficient when compared to other innovations made since (more-or-less) the dawn of thinking man when combustion motors were made along with the wheel and probably designer sunglasses so you could cruise around picking up cavewomen.

There are a lot of other old technologies used that I break down in a similar manner. Along with that, there are more enviro-friendly goods that I don't like, but they are usually very small scale things like packaging - things that are instantly consumed.

I think the push against fighting for better consumption habits doesn't make any sense because at its root is the fight against innovation and technology. The workers should look forward to learning new skills on new machinery. By the time grandpa stopped being scared of computers, he wasted 20 years of long division in accounting, only to find himself seeing the wonders in how to make speedy burger orders.

Companies should be more eager to change models if it means longevity for their name. That's not the motivation by CEOs who want to cash out so their families can buy hamburgers from my grandfather.

Politicians are no different this way around than any other and as a general rule stay straight up with everyone because eventually everyone figures out what they've left out.

Reply With Quote