Seabass wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:36 pm
Forty Two wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 1:01 pm
My position has been for some time that the solution to the causes of climate change is technology and science.
Sweet mother of god.
:quintuplefacepalm:
What, like reducing our reliance on oil and "beautiful, clean coal" in favor of solar, wind, and various other clean energy sources?
That could be part of the plan, sure. Mainly, though, any thinking person looking at the issue would lean more toward nuclear power as the answer, because the power needs are just too great to be solvable in the near term with solar and wind.
However, one of the bigger greenhouse gas outputs is cattle. That's quite well accepted, and that's one of the reasons why the green movement is giving to have folks become vegetarians or vegans - because if we didn't have the cattle we do, that would be a significant reduction in greenhouse gasses. Do you dispute that?
Seabass wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:36 pm
The cognitive dissonance that you are capable of is truly fucking extraordinary.
You obviously don't know what cognitive dissonance means.
Seabass wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:36 pm
Your
actual position is that the solution to climate change is technology and science... that those evil, far-left, socialist, Marxist, communist Democrats have not yet publicly supported.
I was stating my position. I welcome anyone to agree with it, even communists.
Seabass wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:36 pm
Blinded by partisanship. Jesus. Reminds me of the time Craig T. Nelson said "I've been on food stamps and welfare, did anybody help me out? No."
What in the world was partisan? It looks like you're blinded by partisanship, because you can't even look at a post about climate change, which presents a new technological advancement and discusses how that might be a significant impact on the gas emissions without thinking that you or some group you "identify" with has been attacked. You haven't been.
If you agree that manufacturing meat could be a good way to reduce cattle ranching, and thereby help reduce the emissions caused by that industry, then we agree. Good! I also think alternative energy sources are good ideas. My preference is nuclear, because of the megawattage that it can produce in comparison to other choices. Nuclear is among the greenest of energies, without the downsides of solar and wind. Nuclear has its own risk and downsides, of course, but on balance that's my preference.
So, what are the inconsistent thoughts or ideas that you think I have? I'll wait.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar