|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 04/01/2008 : 12:43:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Bill scott
Why just an offset and not a negative? The status quo is resulting in doomsday. An offset only leaves us with the status quo. |
No, the status quo is continued increasing carbon emissions. Carbon at its current atmospheric levels doesn't result in doomsday, so if everyone were simply carbon-neutral, the catastrophy will be averted.
|
A dire effort I am afraid in the light of China and India. Al is going to have to break the bank to offset them. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2008 : 13:02:52 [Permalink]
|
I must confess that I didn't know much about Al's Nashville shack beyond the fact that he has one that he bought in '02. So, I finally looked it up.
When purchased, it was a pretentious energy hog, and it still consumes more in a month than I do in a year, but it seems that he's slowly rectifying that. NASHVILLE, Tennessee (AP) -- Al Gore, who was criticized for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion, has completed a host of improvements to make the home more energy efficient, and a building-industry group has praised the house as one of the nation's most environmentally friendly.
The former vice president has installed solar panels, a rainwater-collection system and geothermal heating. He also replaced all incandescent lights with compact fluorescent or light-emitting diode bulbs -- even on his Christmas tree.
"Short of tearing it down and staring anew, I don't know how it could have been rated any higher," said Kim Shinn of the U.S. Green Building Council, which gave the house its second-highest rating for sustainable design.
Gore's improvements cut the home's summer electrical consumption by 11 percent compared with a year ago, according to utility records reviewed by The Associated Press. Most Nashville homes used 20 percent to 30 percent more electricity during the same period because of a record heat wave.
Shinn said Gore's renovations are impressive because his home, which is more than 80 years old, had to meet the same rigorous standards as new construction.
|
I don't think it will ever be as cheap to live in as, say, an igloo, but then, what is? And it is to be remembered that his and his wife's offices are in there with all of the traffic and stay-over guests that implies. Looks to me that he ain't doin' all that bad with it, at least not as shabby as you might have us to believe. And as the technology breaks through, I'm sure he'll go farther.
An engineer, then? Where did I get the impression that you were a contractor? Senile dementia creeps ever closer.... I welcome it and it's attendant freedom from responsibility.
As to Gore's 'Doomsday Prophecy' (your words, not mine), I'm not worried about it because the fate of all species is extinction. The best that we can do is put it off as long as possible. And Gore is spending a lot of his fortune toward that end.
Oh hell, Bill, you're a serious Christian; you should be used to that sort of thing -- Rapture & Armageddon & Noah's canoe vacation & so forth.
Y'know, the thought occurred to me: are so many big-name Christian organizations pissed about the efforts to at least alleviate some of the effects of climate change because it slows and even hinders God's Plan to again waste us all? I dunno, but it's hard to surprise me these days.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2008 : 13:08:04 [Permalink]
|
Bill, why are you such a hypocrite? Everyone here knows that you are a vocal Christian, yet here you are--a businessman and homeowner who spends his time posting on the internet. For shame! If you really believed in the doomsday you preach, that Jesus the Son of God will return to judge all men, clearly you would have sold everything you own and dedicated your life to some monastic order, or at the very least moved to an impoverished country to work for the needs of the underprivileged. What a faker you are, no better than Hitler.
Because, Bill, if you are going to hold Gore to the ridiculous standard that anything short of 100% obsessed fanaticism is the same as two-faced hypocrisy, then you and the rest of your fellow cultists clearly own the largest gap between what you profess to believe and how you conduct yourselves. Ah, but you don't mean for your argument to apply to anyone but Gore, do you? That's the definition of hypocrisy.
Just admit that this whole rant of yours is just another example of your freakish, petty, reactionary, unthinking, emotional hatred for Al Gore and liberals, Bill, because we here in the reality based community don't buy your dishonest spin tactics and never will.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2008 : 14:25:18 [Permalink]
|
There's some classic Bill scott goal-post shifting going on!Bill: Gore doesn't practice what he preaches.
Dave: Yes, he does.
Bill: Well, he can and should do more than that. Bill, it's obvious you just don't like Gore, but all these rationalizations are silly.Originally posted by Bill scott
Because a negative factor for a footprint would be much better then an offset factor of zero and in a doomsday situation such as ours one must look at what all they can do and just not what can be done to slide by. |
And that's not Gore's message, either.| Does Al really need his mansion when he can maintain a more modest living quarters and buy carbon offsets giving him a negative factor, which might be the tipping point in avoiding doomsday? This would be a no brainier, if Al really believes his own message that is. |
Go ask him that, Bill, instead of just assuming its truth.| So just imagine how far we could move forward if this, on top of limiting personal housing space to a modest figure, would be accomplished by all parties. Yet when facing doomsday this messenger decides to not do all that he can, even in the face of such a dire outcome. |
Since you don't have access to Gore's finacial records, how can you assert that he's not doing all he can?| And they are being scolded for using the energy and gas that they do use by those who consume many times more then them. |
Prove it, Bill: show me just one such "scolding."| To help ease their mind for scolding the common man... |
Prove it, Bill.| "Sure I may pay out $1000's in utilities bills every month and burn through 1000's of gallons of aviation fuel a year but look at my Prius I park in the garage. Oh, and I payed some guy to plant a tree. I am doing my part to avoid doomsday. What a great person I am." |
Yes, if all he did was own a Prius and planted one tree, you'd be right. But you're just painting a silly caricature in order to ridicule it.| But they just pay some guy to plant a tree and all is cool with them consuming so much more energy then everyone else. |
But that doesn't matter. We could all use ten times the energy we do if we made the appropriate offsets.| If one aims for zero personal carbon using offsets, |
If one aims for zero, but can hit a negative factor with ease if he really wanted to (it might take a sacrifice of some kind), all while preaching doomsday to everyone else then one doubts whether the messenger believes his own message. |
No, you are just over-reaching in order to justify your dislike of Gore, and making yourself look the fool in the process, Bill.| That is practicing what Gore "preaches," Bill. The hypocrisy of Swaggart is nowhere in sight, because Gore's goal isn't for everyone to spend less money (that's just a side benefit). |
Semantics. I am not asking everyone else to do as Al Gore says. I am asking AL to do as Al says. Al won't give up certain luxuries in the face of doomsday, he would rather just cut a check then do both. |
But it all has the same effect, Bill. You're trying to make an argument that cutting a check is less effective than cutting back, but it's not true. It's not a semantics issue, it's your blatantly false premise that's the issue.| Your mistaken. Al has made himself the champion of saving the planet from certain doomsday so nothing less then a 100% effort is expected. Even negating his own footprint is far less then Al could do. With just a little effort he could even carry a negative footprint. A no brainier in the face of doomsday wouldn't you say? Again, here is a place where Al, as the self-titled champion of the cause, can lead by example and trim down his footprint, in light of his carbon credits. |
The only person who's championing deprivation is you, Bill. Part of Gore's point is that the changes needed to overcome your alleged doomsday scenario are not huge sacrifices.| And then when he is called on his transgressions he simply believes cutting a check will wipe his hands clean of any innocent blood that he has spilled. |
Again: where is the evidence that supports your accusation, Bill? |
10,000 sq/ft of evidence is sitting down in Tennessee as we speak. |
You said that it is "when he is called on his transgressions" he cuts a check to overcome guilt. I asked for evidence for that assertion, and you talk about his house? You were supposed to show me that the only times he buys offsets is when his extravagance makes the news, Bill.| In this case, the problem will go away with enough investment. Go figure! |
Really, then what is the hold up? |
More money is needed, obviously.| But why wouldn't Al want to do both in the face of doomsday? Reduce and offset that is. The whole lead by example thing again |
And still you're harping on your moved goalposts. First it was "Al doesn't do what he says we should do," and now that you've been shown to be wrong, it's "Al doesn't do all he can do." You're a hypocrite, Bill, because you waste time posting here when you could be doing all you can do for what you believe in. At least, I hope that what you believe is not that Al Gore must be villified at all costs.| If you can show any evidence for anyone without wealth suffering any sort of injustice at the hands of global warming activists, I'd be mighty interested in it. |
Sure, mostly because of environmental pressures no new oil refinery has been built in the US since 1976. As the demand for gasoline goes up and the ability to refine it does not we get a bottleneck in the supply and demand which causes gas and other comedies produced from oil to rise in price. This rise does little to effect the private travel of the wealthy, as demonstrated by Al Gore, but this hits the average man on the street hard when his budget was already strained to begin with. |
Are you kidding me? You may as well have complained that because Saudi Arabia has lots of oil, it's a "Get Out of Jail Free" card for Saudis, but for Americans, go to jail. The idea that high gas prices are due - even in large part - to global warming activists is ludicrous, especially when you've complained that 30 years ago, the worry was about global cooling.
And Exxon is making record-high profits. They could be selling gas much more cheaply if they decided to sell gasoline at cost. Therefore, Exxon is causing a grave injustice to the poor. From the numbers I can find, their $40 billion profit in 2007 would have been enough to buy every American's gasoline for at least a year.
Good grief, Bill. Show me the poor people who are being "scolded" for not buying carbon offsets. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2008 : 14:26:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Bill scott
Why just an offset and not a negative? The status quo is resulting in doomsday. An offset only leaves us with the status quo. |
No, the status quo is continued increasing carbon emissions. Carbon at its current atmospheric levels doesn't result in doomsday, so if everyone were simply carbon-neutral, the catastrophy will be averted. |
A dire effort I am afraid in the light of China and India. Al is going to have to break the bank to offset them. |
Apparently, Bill, in your mind "everyone" doesn't include China and India. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 07:40:47 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
There's some classic Bill scott goal-post shifting going on!
Bill: Gore doesn't practice what he preaches.
Dave: Yes, he does.
Bill: Well, he can and should do more than that.
Bill, it's obvious you just don't like Gore, but all these rationalizations are silly. |
That might be true if I bought into the whole carbon credit bit. But I see it (carbon credits) as a simple token jesture at best and a Al Gore for profit business at worst.
The shortcomings of current carbon trading systems are clear. As a piece in Newsweek concluded, "So far, the real winners in emissions trading have been polluting factory owners who can sell menial cuts for massive profits and the brokers who pocket fees each time a company buys or sells the right to pollute." Currently, the link between the purchase of carbon offsets and the actual reduction of carbon emissions is highly controversial and almost impossible to verify. The process is easily manipulated. Measurement tools are remarkably primitive. Even the most basic calculations are subject to wide variations. The New Internationalist requested estimates from four reputable carbon trading companies for the number of credits a passenger would need to purchase to offset an around-the-world flight, starting and ending in London. The magazine received four answers: 4.3, 6, 8.68 and 11.63 tons. Despite the criticisms, the concept of emissions trading continues to be vigorously supported by major U.S. environmental organizations.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, recently embraced by nine northeastern and mid-Atlantic states, allows for carbon trading, as does California's new global warming initiative. Emissions trading is at the heart of the European Union's strategy to meet its Kyoto Protocol goals. Several congressional bills embrace carbon trading to meet greenhouse gas-reduction goals.
Most environmentalists tend to agree with the assessment of Dan Esty, director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy: "Carbon trading is a promising strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions but the current structures have serious flaws."
In other words, the system is new. As with all new systems, carbon offset trading is working out the kinks. Carbon trading 2.0 will be much better than carbon trading 1.0. Give it a chance.
I disagree. Carbon trading is not a promising strategy. Its costs outweigh its benefits. We don't need carbon trading to reduce carbon emissions. Indeed, it is likely that we will reduce carbon emissions much more without carbon trading.
Unfortunately, policymakers and environmentalists have all but welded together the words, "cap" and "trade." They talk as if a cap cannot exist without a trading mechanism. That's not true. We can have caps without trade.
We should impose an immediate moratorium on carbon trading while imposing ever-more rigorous carbon caps. And stop the use of long-distance offsets. All offsets should be local or regional
http://tinyurl.com/2ytmw9
Maybe our very existence isn't threatened.
Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.
Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.
Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore receives $20,0 |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 04/02/2008 07:56:10 |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 07:52:50 [Permalink]
|
| Y'know, the thought occurred to me: are so many big-name Christian organizations pissed about the efforts to at least alleviate some of the effects of climate change because it slows and even hinders God's Plan to again waste us all? I dunno, but it's hard to surprise me these days. |
Don't forget that many of those organizations have now come around to the reality of the situation and some are even leading the way. They found that GWB's scrotum was not the place it was cracked up to be and they split. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 08:38:24 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by H. Humbert |
| Bill, why are you such a hypocrite? |
*yawn*
| Everyone here knows that you are a vocal Christian, yet here you are--a businessman and homeowner who spends his time posting on the internet. |
So it says in the Bible that no one is be a businessman, homeowner or post on the internet?
That carries a lot of weight, coming from you. *sigh*
| If you really believed in the doomsday you preach, that Jesus the Son of God will return to judge all men, |
Doomsday?
| clearly you would have sold everything you own and dedicated your life to some monastic order, or at the very least moved to an impoverished country to work for the needs of the underprivileged. |
I am not sure where you live but I have plenty of impoverished and underprivileged living right here in my home town.
| What a faker you are, no better than Hitler. |
I am afraid I am going to have to consider the source when evaluating this conclusion.
| Because, Bill, if you are going to hold Gore to the ridiculous standard that anything short of 100% obsessed fanaticism is the same as two-faced hypocrisy, |
And here we obviously disagree. Where I see it perfectly acceptable to expect Al to live by the same standards he preaches to his flock you see this as obsessed fanaticism
| then you and the rest of your fellow cultists clearly own the largest gap between what you profess to believe and how you conduct yourselves. |
So your just lumping me in with every other Christian in the US/World to come to your blanket conclusion?
| Ah, but you don't mean for your argument to apply to anyone but Gore, do you? |
Have you seen the subject of this thread?
| That's the definition of hypocrisy. |
What is?
| Just admit that this whole rant of yours is just another example of your freakish, petty, reactionary, unthinking, emotional hatred for Al Gore and liberals, |
I fail to see why you accept the "do as I say not as I do" actions of your champion.
| Bill, because we here in the reality based community don't buy your dishonest spin tactics and never will. |
But yet you buy the whole carbon credit offset mythology? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 08:42:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Bill scott
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Bill scott
Why just an offset and not a negative? The status quo is resulting in doomsday. An offset only leaves us with the status quo. |
No, the status quo is continued increasing carbon emissions. Carbon at its current atmospheric levels doesn't result in doomsday, so if everyone were simply carbon-neutral, the catastrophy will be averted. |
A dire effort I am afraid in the light of China and India. Al is going to have to break the bank to offset them. |
Apparently, Bill, in your mind "everyone" doesn't include China and India.
|
You said "if everyone." I was simply pointing out that this is a pretty big "if" in the context of the new China and India we see in todays world. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 09:49:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
That might be true if I bought into the whole carbon credit bit. But I see it (carbon credits) as a simple token jesture at best and a Al Gore for profit business at worst. |
Apparently, Bill, you can't even be bothered to differentiate between carbon credits and carbon offsets. Such a lack of attention to facts is, perhaps, the basis for the problems you have not only with global warming, but with evolution, too. You simply don't care to understand the science, so it all seems wrong to you. But then, hypocritically, you care enough about the necessarily flawed conclusions you reach (necessarily flawed because you don't care about the science) to berate others when they don't agree with you.| And that's my point, it needs to be. Al's handwave of his critics by pointing out his purchase of carbon credits is nothing but a joke and a scam to allow him to do that which he has asked his flock not to do. |
See there? The pieces you quoted said, at best, that carbon offsets might be a problem, but you've concluded from that that Gore's efforts are "a joke and a scam." It's that sort of "logic" that ensures that you'll have zero credibility around here, Bill.| When I say "all he can do" I am referring to cutting back on travel and living accommodations to begin with. You know, what he is asking all of us to do. |
Quote him doing so.| Al scolds the general public for being stuck in their ways in response to a poll which shows around 20% of Americans consider MMGW a major issue... |
Source?| Well according to most of the pieces I am coming across my caricature is not far from reality. |
The pieces you've referenced are all right-wing political attacks on Gore. Of course they're going to make the same mistakes that you are.| Not to even mention Al is making money off his carbon credits. Just great! |
It seems you can't even read the attack pieces correctly.| So far my research shows most of these "appropriate" offsets to be complete fairy tales in reality. |
Of course it would.| What you call over-reaching others just call it asking Al to do himself what Al preaches the flock to do. |
Quote him preaching.| Everything I have found shows that it's not the same effect, but rather a token jester at best and a Al Gore money making business at worst. |
And it seems you haven't looked very hard.| Then why can't he sacrifice a little of his own? |
Have you ever ridden in a Prius??| And simply paying money to his own company is not a sacrifice. |
And that's not all he's doing.| You said that it is "when he is called on his transgressions" he cuts a check to overcome guilt. I asked for evidence for that assertion, and you talk about his house? You were supposed to show me that the only times he buys offsets is when his extravagance makes the news, Bill. |
Well I don't know about only but shortly after Al won his Oscar all the flap hit about his actual utility usage and he immediately pointed out how he cuts a check (to his own company) to offset this. That was his rebuttal, "I cut a check." |
And you jumped to the conclusion you did based on that?| So with the future of civilization in the balance what's the hold up? |
The Bush Administration, congressional Republicans and global-warming deniers in general.| I never moved the goalposts. I still don't think Al does what he asks others to do and to simply toss this accusation aside with the words carbon credit is nothing but a whitewash, as demonstrated. |
As demonstrated? Hardly.| and now that you've been shown to be wrong, |
Wrong? I have shown the carbon credits to be a token jester at best and a Al Gore for profit business at worst. |
See, you can't even be bothered to correctly remember what you'd previously said, and so now you're puzzled when it's pointed out that you were wrong.| Don't tell me your falling into the dude and HH camp. Your above that, Dave. |
Yes, you pay so little attention to the things that go on around here. I believe I was the first to point out your hypocrisy, Bill, years ago. If not me, it was Tommy Huxley. Dude and H. must be considered mere copycats. As to whether I'm above it, you're a fine one to talk.| You may be right on the all I can do, but being skeptical of MMGW is what I believe in, for this issue that is. |
But how Al Gore lives has nothing to do with whether MMGW exists. Gore's lifestyle is nothing more than a political football to be kicked around by both Gore and his detractors, and has no bearing at all on the science.| I simply believe that Al Gore should be held to the same standard he holds his flock to. |
I don't think you actually know what those standards are.| And please, no more about him writing carbon credit checks to himself. |
Of course not, since you've ludicrously allowed yourself to conclude that they're "a joke and a scam" based on little more than the proclamations of Wing-Nut Daily and other obviously politically charged sources.| I don't know what your talking about. The Saudis are not even our number one oil supplier. |
I was making the same argument as you were, using a different subject, to demonstrate the absurdity of the "injustice" you tried to point out.| Well maybe I lumped MMGW activists into the term environmentalist but I don't have the time right now to break down the environmental crowd into their own little clicks. That could be a thread in and of itself. |
Thanks for admitting that your argument was fatally flawed.| Last I knew most oil companies were responsible to their share holders, which Al Gore is a share holder of an oil company, so to sell the gas at cost ain't gonna happen. |
Duh.| But I never said the profits were moral and just. |
No, you said that high gas prices are an injustice levelled at the poor, and caused by global warming activists. And my rebuttal was to show, in no uncertain terms, that the blame properly lies with the fuel companies themselves (and their greedy stockholders).| I said that by us not building a new refinery in over 30 years, in light of higher demand, and the fact that we are very limited in how much homegrown oil we can drill for, which causes us to be dependent on foreign sources, in light of new heavy demand for oil from other markets, that this has set the stage for the oil companies to make their record profits. |
Yes, all in response to a question about how global-warming activists have injustices to the poor. It was quite a long non-answer given your admittedly overly broad premises. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 09:50:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
You said "if everyone." I was simply pointing out that this is a pretty big "if" in the context of the new China and India we see in todays world. |
Yes, and doomsayers like yourself aren't helping. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 09:53:54 [Permalink]
|
| I see it (carbon credits) as a simple token jesture at best and a Al Gore for profit business at worst. |
Bill, the idea that Gore "cuts a check to himself" as some sort of "token gesture" is your own delusion. That's what you have made up because you hate the man. You keep confusing your emotional fantasies with reality. Stop, because no one buys it. If you have managed to delude yourself, then too bad for you.
| And here we obviously disagree. Where I see it perfectly acceptable to expect Al to live by the same standards he preaches to his flock you see this as obsessed fanaticism. |
Living a carbon neutral life is the standard he preaches to everyone else. You're criticizing Gore for not living up to your standards for Gore. That's what I tried to demonstrate by telling you what your standards should be as a Christian, but I should know by now that you lack the sufficient brainpower to make connections between disparate ideas. You only know how to repeat what your handlers tell you to say.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 04/02/2008 12:16:25 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 11:06:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Everyone here knows that you are a vocal Christian, yet here you are--a businessman and homeowner who spends his time posting on the internet. |
So it says in the Bible that no one is be a businessman, homeowner or post on the internet?
|
Matthew 6:19
Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
Luke 14:33
Any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.
Matthew 6:24
No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Money.
Luke 18:22
When Jesus heard this, He said to him, "One thing you still lack; sell all that you possess and distribute it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me."
Just saying...
|
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 12:29:04 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| Apparently, Bill, you can't even be bothered to differentiate between carbon credits and carbon offsets. |
A carbon offset is a financial instrument representing a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Although there are six primary categories of greenhouse gases, carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e). One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.
Carbon credits are a key component of national and international emissions trading schemes that have been implemented to mitigate global warming. They provide a way to reduce greenhouse effect emissions on an industrial scale by capping total annual emissions and letting the market assign a monetary value to any shortfall through trading. Credits can be exchanged between businesses or bought and sold in international markets at the prevailing market price. Credits can be used to finance carbon reduction schemes between trading partners and around the world.
| And that's my point, it needs to be. Al's handwave of his critics by pointing out his purchase of carbon credits is nothing but a joke and a scam to allow him to do that which he has asked his flock not to do. |
See there? The pieces you quoted said, at best, that carbon offsets might be a problem, but you've concluded from that that Gore's efforts are "a joke and a scam." It's that sort of "logic" that ensures that you'll have zero credibility around here, Bill. |
Yes, their might be a problem for a person who sees a conflict of interest in Al preaching MMGW and carbon credits to offset ones footprint and coincidentally Al just happens to have a vested interest in these carbon credits. What a shocker! Al is making money off of his doomsday prophecy. But hey, some might not have a problem with this
| When I say "all he can do" I am referring to cutting back on travel and living accommodations to begin with. You know, what he is asking all of us to do. |
Quote him doing so. |
The post-2000 Gore has changed one angle of his green message: In his book, "Earth in the Balance," Gore warned that "sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation of society" would be necessary to save the planet. Even if a "miraculous technology" was able to cut per-capita greenhouse gas emissions in half, he wrote, Washington still would have to raise taxes on gasoline, electricity and heating oil.
No doubt this would inflict great sacrifice on the common working man.
| Well according to most of the pieces I am coming across my caricature is not far from reality. |
The pieces you've referenced are all right-wing political attacks on Gore. Of course they're going to make the same mistakes that you are. |
Again with the whole right-wing conspiracy thing? And just because it is right-wing does not mean that it is wrong by default.
www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54528
www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976926811
riehlworldview.com/.../2007/03/al_gores_inconv.html
www.algore.org/node/403
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/2/28/142546.shtml
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover031307.htm
http://www.carboncreditkillers.com/default.asp
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm
http://thelondonfog.blogspot.com/2007/04/al-gore-is-full-of-carbon-credits.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/07/02/carbon_credits/?source=newsletter
http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/04/26/carbon-offsets-are-a-sham/
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/47013.php
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2007/02/save_the_planet.html
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/environment/2007/02/gore-v-think-tank-power-consumption-dig.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1599714,00.html
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200703/NAT20070307a.html
etc... etc... etc....
The right wing juggernaut/conspiracy just rolls on and on....
| Not to even mention Al is making money off his carbon credits. Just great! |
It seems you can't even read the attack pieces correctly. |
Right. When they pay for Al's jet travels and utilities for his mansion this is not Al making money. This is just Al's company offsetting his footprint using company money. Well I am going to send them my utilities and gas bill and they can offset me to zero as well. That works out pretty cool in my eyes.
| So far my research shows most of these "appropriate" offsets to be complete fairy tales in reality. |
Of course it would. |
No surprise here.
| What you call over-reaching others just call it asking Al to do himself what Al preaches the flock to do. |
Quote him preaching. |
"Do as I say and not as I do" Al Gore
| Everything I have found shows that it's not the same effect, but rather a token jester at best and a Al Gore money making business at worst. |
And it seems you haven't looked very hard. |
I didn't have to. It is all over the net.
| Then why can't he sacrifice a little of his own? |
Have you ever ridden in a Prius?? |
Nope. But I did design a part that we make and sell to Toyota that goes on the thing.
| And simply paying money to his own company is not a sacrifice. |
And that's not all he's doing. |
Fine. Still is no sacrifice however.
| And you jumped to the conclusion you did based on that? |
Jumped? When Al was pressed on his own footprint he handwaved it off with a check to his own company.
| So with the future of civilization in the balance what's the hold up? |
The Bush Administration, congressional Republicans and global-warming deniers in general. |
So what was done about all this during the Clinton/Gore years? What has the democratic congress and senate done that has resulted in less CO2? And as a MMGW denier I certainly won't stop anyone wanting to spend their money on credits etc... I may snicker a little...
| and now that you've been shown to be wrong, |
Wrong? I have shown the carbon credits to be a token jester at best and a Al Gore for profit business at worst. |
See, you can't even be bothered to correctly remember what you'd previously said, and so now you're puzzled when it's pointed out that you were wrong. |
I simply played along with your notion that Al was neutral to keep the conversation rolling forward. I never fell for the concept that Al was neutral by simple cutting a check to himself.
Don't tell me your falling into the dude and HH camp. Your above that, Dave |
Yes, you pay so little attention to the things that go on around here. |
Your right. I enjoy this site once and awhile but I am not logged on 24/7/365, as some.
| I believe I was the first to point out your hypocrisy, Bill, years ago. If not me, it was Tommy Huxley. Dude and H. must be considered mere copycats. |
The good ol days. I miss Tommy.
| As to whether I'm above it, you're a fine one to talk. |
Apparently I was wrong and your not.
| But how Al Gore lives has nothing to do with whether MMGW exists. |
Never said that it did.
| Gore's lifestyle is nothing more than a political football to be kicked around by both Gore and his detractors, and has no bearing at all on the science. |
Could not agree anymore.
| I simply believe that Al Gore should be held to the same standard he holds his flock to. |
I don't think you actually know what those standards are. |
Well I sure wont learn the standards by watching Al Gore himself.
| And please, no more about him writing carbon credit checks to himself. |
Of course not, since you've ludicrously allowed yourself to conclude that they're "a joke and a scam" based on little more than the proclamations of Wing-Nut Daily and other obviously politically charged sources. |
Oh yeah, you and Hillary with the vast right wing conspiracy drum beat.
| I don't know what your talking about. The Saudis are not even our number one oil supplier. |
I was making the same argument as you were, using a different subject, to demonstrate the absurdity of the "injustice" you tried to point out. |
What point?
| Well maybe I lumped MMGW activists into the term environmentalist but I don't have the time right now to break down the environmental crowd into their own little clicks. That could be a thread in and of itself. |
Thanks for admitting that your argument was fatally flawed. |
I didn't.
| Last I knew most oil companies were responsible to their share holders, which Al Gore is a share holder of an oil company, so to sell the gas at cost ain't gonna happen. |
Duh. |
Exactly my point.
| But I never said the profits were moral and just. |
No, you said that high gas prices are an injustice leveled at the poor, |
I never said they were leveled at the poor. I said the poor felt the biggest crunch of the high prices.
| and caused by global warming activists. |
The high prices are a result of limited refining capacities (pushed for by environmental activists which include those of the MMGW type) as demand rises in concert with a limited amount of homegrown oil allowed to be tapped (pushed for by environmental activists which include those of the MMGW type)causing us to be dependent on foreign oil in a world of ever increasing demand and with output not keeping up.
| And my rebuttal was to show, in no uncertain terms, that the blame properly lies with the fuel companies themselves (and their greedy stockholders). |
Why? They are responsable to the shareholders and they didn't set the stage for the high prices. They want to build new refineries and tap for oil in the homeland. It's the environmentalists who don't and now as a result we have a limited supply of gas to meet a growing demand. *poof* high gas prices
Al is a vested shareholder you know...
| Yes, all in response to a question about how global-warming activists have injustices to the poor. |
It's simple. The activists have cut supply by limiting no new refineries be built and limited the amount of homegrown oil which can be tapped and the result is high gas prices in a world where demand is growing fast. The poor are the first to suffer the effects of high gas prices, period. So, therefore, intended or not, the activists have caused the poor much grief. It's just that simple
| You said "if everyone." I was simply pointing out that this is a pretty big "if" in the context of the new China and India we see in today's world. |
Yes, and doomsayers like yourself aren't helping. |
No, I am helping. Even if the concept did work offsets would be a drop in a 55 gallon drum compared to the CO2 China and India are/will be pumping out. That is why I said Al would break the bank trying to offset these guys. I am calling all to arms and naming the biggest contributors by name. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2008 : 12:59:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| Apparently, Bill, you can't even be bothered to differentiate between carbon credits and carbon offsets. |
A carbon offset is a financial instrument representing a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Although there are six primary categories of greenhouse gases, carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e). One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.
Carbon credits are a key component of national and international emissions trading schemes that have been implemented to mitigate global warming. They provide a way to reduce greenhouse effect emissions on an industrial scale by capping total annual emissions and letting the market assign a monetary value to any shortfall through trading. Credits can be exchanged between businesses or bought and sold in international markets at the prevailing market price. Credits can be used to finance carbon reduction schemes between trading partners and around the world.
|
Copy-and-pasted from Right Side News, one of the most overtly prejudiced "news" sources I've seen on the net. Bill sure makes a good parrot. Too bad this doesn't demonstrate that he doesn't comprehends anything he repeats.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 04/02/2008 12:59:40 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Al tells it like it is.
