• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Lectro was RIGHT--post1626--(climate related)

The idea that the environmental movement is just a blame game of fatalism is wrong. You can of course find examples of that, and examples of anything, but the overwhelming message is (a) we have a big problem on our hands and here is the scientific proof, (2) we have the solutions at hand and they are becoming more and more affordable every day, and (3) taking steps to address the problem is a huge economic and social opportunity.

Any bullshit like the above post are the opinions of Lectro alone. These opinions feed into his own conclusion that environmentalism is naive and dumb, and that he is stronger than such weaklings.

Here are some examples:

"Many home improvement industries have become synonymous with smarmy, sharp-suited salespeople and their underhand sales tactics."

"A common response to good news about global health, wealth, and sustenance is that it cannot continue. As we infest the world with our teeming numbers, guzzle the earth’s bounty heedless of its finitude, and foul our nests with pollution and waste, we are hastening an environmental day of reckoning. If overpopulation, resource depletion, and pollution don’t finish us off, then climate change will."

"Yet today, many voices in the traditional environmental movement refuse to acknowledge that progress, or even that human progress is a worthy aspiration."


Skepticism based on sound science is welcomed, but this is just opinion made up to satisfy a worldview.
 
Baloney. Socialism dressed up as Science.

I am an environmental scientist (I’ve published a paper in the journal Environmental Management and a few in Biological Conservation) and a socialist (I voted for Bernie and still sort his bumper sticker), and I can assure you that you are incorrect.
 
I am an environmental scientist (I’ve published a paper in the journal Environmental Management and a few in Biological Conservation) and a socialist (I voted for Bernie and still sort his bumper sticker), and I can assure you that you are incorrect.

Baloney
 
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201801


201801.gif



201801.gif




you should go to the source of the data and not an opinion piece.
 
Lectro not only doesn't understand science. He doesn't understand capitalism and the free market. The market has spoken. The public wants renewable options and is willing to pay for them.

Don’t think it is a good thing, but this post is just an atrocity when it comes to the truth. Americans want to cheapest form of energies possible, so they can continue to buy the cheapest goods possible from amazon and Walmart.

America is producing more crude oil now than anytime in our history. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...ude-oil-production-hits-an-all-time-high.html
 
Gallup data

fogcfkqyrem0hoz8fvdxkw.png


Question: Which of the following approaches to solving the nation's energy problems do you think the U.S. should follow right now -- [ROTATED: emphasize production of more oil, gas and coal supplies (or) emphasize the development of alternative energy such as wind and solar power]?

[look at the data following the question—it Doesn’t copy well for here]
 
Drill baby Drill. We need to pump as much CO2 into the atmosphere and hope that it actually warms the environment. It may be the only way to survive the coming Ice Age

You are pure Moron
 
Back
Top