Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And since you are the most-enlightened of all, you believe it is your job to tell us morons what to think, because obviously anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is either brainwashed by Exxon, or crazy.
PS: Balance is important but so is being informed. I did the better part of my career working for just as large an energy company, in headquarters. Better informed opinion SHOULD be weighted higher than uninformed opinion. Either way, best everyone avoid being "brain washed" by either side, no matter what side their bread may be buttered...
The point I was trying to make is, there is no such thing as balance. Because there is no objective way to measure it.
I could call anything I want balanced, and you could call anything you want balanced, it doesn't make it so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
How do you think that price for a loaf of bread was arrived at regardless how YOU value a loaf of bread?
The price of a loaf of bread is primarily associated with the amount of labor required to produce it. A better analogy would be "fine art". How much is the Mona Lisa worth? That depends entirely on the person.
To a collector it is priceless, but I wouldn't hang it on my wall if someone gave it to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Fortunately, lots of people consider clean water very much a part of a higher material standard-of-living."
I agree, but you are still missing my point.
What do you think of treehuggers? What do they think of you? And what do they think of your "balanced approach"?
To you, treehuggers are just "extremists". But to them, you are a selfish materialist, who is destroying the planet for your own comforts and pleasure. To you, wind turbines, solar panels, and even hydroelectric dams, are going to save the planet with renewable energy. To them, they are just fish and bird killers, and inevitably pollute and disfigure the planet, and require large-scale mining and the production of hundreds of chemicals which inevitably get released into the environment at some level.
It is you who insists that there is a right answer and a wrong answer, not me.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 04-22-2019 at 10:50 AM..
If I had a nickel for every time someone thought it necessary to explain my opinion is just my opinion, I'd have a lot of nickels...
Unfortunately, that's where a lot of people end up when it seems they are frustrated, but who really needs such a thing explained? Of course I am expressing my opinion, and I'm doing my best to justify my opinion. So what do you do? You fabricate a quote and falsely attribute it to me in rather insulting fashion. After offering up a video that seems to be you embarrassing yourself. That's you in that video almost verbatim! Just more nonsense to draw away from where the focus about this topic should be.
Tell you what. You show me any person who expresses their opinion in this forum, including yourself, who doesn't think their opinion is most worthy. For bonus points, show me anyone who changes their mind about anything. Instead of objective reason, people like you will turn to is more of this sort of nonsense. Instead of addressing the substantive parts of these comments, you what to make it about me thinking I am "smarter than everyone else."
Reminds me of the two hikers who encounter a bear and immediately one of the hikers begins to take off his hiking shoes. The other hiker asks "what are you doing? You can't out run that bear." The hiker taking off his shoes replies, "I don't need to out run that bear. I just need to out run YOU."
I don't care to play this ego game of yours. I'm just interested in "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." Some people have a reasoned approach toward arriving at the truth despite all the "noise" while others can't seem to put their ego and emotions aside long enough to punch their way out of a paper bag...
The only ego on display here is yours. You're holding onto your ego SO tightly that your mind is closed and therefore you are simply incapable of considering the following...
Not ALL of the factors that have affected earth's 4+ billion year history of climate change have been definitively ruled out as the cause of earth's current climate change
Scientific data and facts actually disprove the hypothesis of AGW/ACC (it isn't even a valid theory)
Scientists who are open to ALL the data and not just that which confirms a certain predetermined bias are skeptical of AGW/ACC
As every scientists knows, or should know... Science is NEVER settled. Just ask the "flat earthers" or the "sun revolves around the earth" contingent.
If you are really interested in the truth, as you say, then why-
1. say AGW is "settled science"?
2. Vilify those who are skeptical of AGW?
3. Deride the characters of the physicists who oppose AGW?
4. Ignore all the data that refutes AGW?
5. Ignore the fact that AGW is an unproven hypothesis?
No rational person would attempt to silence or eliminate further study of a scientific problem. Why is this the case with AGW?
Why start with this back-handed question in the first place? Is anyone not "really interested in the truth?" Of course I am...
1. Never did.
2. Exchange of opinion with honest effort to justify that opinion is not to vilify anyone.
3. Not done that either.
4. Not done that either.
5. Not done this either. Mostly I poke away at what seems obvious in terms of what more we can better do to protect our environment, also in ways many believe contributes to AGW.
You will encounter no bigger fan of science and the scientific method than me in this regard, and of course science ENCOURAGES AND INVITES any and all new discoveries that might further our understanding about what is going on around us. We've got no better source of understanding even if not perfect and always "unsettled." There are degrees of "unsettled," however, and there in lies what we are forced to consider as well.
Let's not focus on people who are not rational in any case. Let's also not be so foolish to suggest all people who are concerned about what climate scientists are warning are irrational. That's simply more noise and nonsense, "loaded rhetoric," that gets in the way sound reason and logic.
The only ego on display here is yours. You're holding onto your ego SO tightly that your mind is closed and therefore you are simply incapable of considering the following...
Not ALL of the factors that have affected earth's 4+ billion year history of climate change have been definitively ruled out as the cause of earth's current climate change
Scientific data and facts actually disprove the hypothesis of AGW/ACC (it isn't even a valid theory)
Scientists who are open to ALL the data and not just that which confirms a certain predetermined bias are skeptical of AGW/ACC
As every scientists knows, or should know... Science is NEVER settled. Just ask the "flat earthers" or the "sun revolves around the earth" contingent.
I'm am experienced with your manner of exchanging opinion in this forum, so I know better than to waste still more time with the likes...
You too will insist on making arguments with yourself that are not mine! Simply read my prior comment, and if you can't see what I mean, don't bother pretending you can have an intelligent discussion about this or anything else.
Or please, do explain how "flat Earthers" are proof the issue of a flat Earth is unsettled. That's another very strong argument to nowhere on your part but why not waste still more time on the absurd?
The point I was trying to make is, there is no such thing as balance. Because there is no objective way to measure it.
I could call anything I want balanced, and you could call anything you want balanced, it doesn't make it so.
I got your point plain and simple, but you miss mine...
Though you are correct, there is often no absolute way to achieve balance or even to know exactly where that point may be, we are nevertheless called upon to judge what to do for better or worse. Your infatuation with measure in these regards has you in mental quicksand that prevents you from turning to better reason and logic about what we CAN do that makes for better rather than worse. Just because we can't know exactly where that effort lands on your spectrum or ruler does NOT mean we can't make progress anyway.
Much like striving for perfection doesn't necessarily mean we get there or even know how to quantify it. Right? Same with balance...
Example. Require very costly double-walled underground fuel tanks at all gas stations to prevent further leaking of fuel into our water tables. Is that the "middle" of compromise? More to the left? Right? 17 degrees left? 94 degrees right? No matter how you or anyone else quantifies the likes, we can still determine it is the right thing to do, as it was when FINALLY double-walled fuel storage tanks were mandated by law.
I'm am experienced with your manner of exchanging opinion in this forum, so I know better than to waste still more time with the likes...
You too will insist on making arguments with yourself that are not mine! Simply read my prior comment, and if you can't see what I mean, don't bother pretending you can have an intelligent discussion about this or anything else.
Or please, do explain how "flat Earthers" are proof the issue of a flat Earth is unsettled. That's another very strong argument to nowhere on your part but why not waste still more time on the absurd?
There's that ego, again.
The point, which you missed, is that the "flat earthers" were absolutely CONVINCED they were correct, at the time. But, they weren't. The AGW/ACCers are making the exact same mistakes and falling into the exact same trap.
Why are you so closed-minded? How does being closed-minded benefit you? Think long and hard about that question...
I ask in all honesty, because just about everything you write seems to suggest a complete lack of knowledge or disregard for this sort of non-fiction.
As the old saying goes, "There is more than one way to skin a cat."
Your problem is, you presuppose some arbitrary starting-point as being the "natural-outcome" of a lack of government-regulation or government-investment. I was merely pointing-out that we didn't get to where we are because the government wasn't involved. Our government has always been involved. And the exploitation of that mine in Montana couldn't have been facilitated without the government's help(think of all the infrastructure that was required to get to it market).
I asked you in an earlier post what you think of the interstate-highway system. Give me as much detail as you would like.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
