Do you feel guilty about the oil spill?
in [Cars]
|
Prev: Government taxes and services was Re: Toyota safety crisis prompts 'black box' plan for new cars and lorries
Next: Operation Distance Chart: 15.66%
From: Matthew Russotto on 8 May 2010 22:37 In article <i1j3u5p24l28lbq70sns2dk1an2dbbs14f(a)4ax.com>, 5440 Dead, 573 since 1/20/09 <zeppp(a)finestplanet.com> wrote: >On Wed, 5 May 2010 12:00:41 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" ><crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >>"Conscience" <nobama@g�v.com> wrote in message >>news:hrqjpn$835$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> On 2010-05-04 18:17:51 -0700, Phlip <phlip2005(a)gmail.com> said: >>> >>>> On May 4, 4:45 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> Do I feel guilty? >>>>> >>>>> No, I do not. >>>>> >>>>> Without regard to any other energy source, America needs oil. >>>> >>>> Witness how emasculated the addict feels if he thinks his source is >>>> threatened. >>> >>> Seriously. >>> >>> Imagine, for example, a real estate business completely reliant on >>> gasoline to shuttle clients and personnel around to sites for sale. >>> >>> Talk about addicts. >>> >> >> >>Or a person that performs services in your home and relies on gasoline to >>make a living. >> >>Addicts. Sheesh! > >Addicts in denial. Oil is a finite resource. So is oxygen. Want to stop using it? -- The problem with socialism is there's always someone with less ability and more need.
From: Matthew Russotto on 8 May 2010 22:58 In article <bc7973f8-a127-401c-bdd2-f767216535f6(a)o14g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, Phlip <phlip2005(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On May 4, 8:36=A0pm, lil abner <@daisey.mae> wrote: > >> A lot/most people that have this irrational conviction that the world >> will be mad right if we regress to a Feudal Agrarian Society are out of >> their tree. > >Of course not. That's why progressives routinely point out that wood- >burning fires have as big a carbon foot print as modern systems. > >Now, the electric car was invented before the gas burner. Can you >think of a reason we went with the less efficient design? Yes. Range, ease of refueling, and power, for three. Also I'm not certain your premise was correct; the early electric cars and electric infrastructure were less efficient than those today. -- The problem with socialism is there's always someone with less ability and more need.
From: 5440 Dead, 573 since 1/20/09 on 8 May 2010 23:57 On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:37:52 -0500, Matthew Russotto wrote: > In article <i1j3u5p24l28lbq70sns2dk1an2dbbs14f(a)4ax.com>, 5440 Dead, 573 > since 1/20/09 <zeppp(a)finestplanet.com> wrote: >>On Wed, 5 May 2010 12:00:41 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" >><crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >>>"Conscience" <nobama@göv.com> wrote in message >>>news:hrqjpn$835$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>> On 2010-05-04 18:17:51 -0700, Phlip <phlip2005(a)gmail.com> said: >>>> >>>>> On May 4, 4:45 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> Do I feel guilty? >>>>>> >>>>>> No, I do not. >>>>>> >>>>>> Without regard to any other energy source, America needs oil. >>>>> >>>>> Witness how emasculated the addict feels if he thinks his source is >>>>> threatened. >>>> >>>> Seriously. >>>> >>>> Imagine, for example, a real estate business completely reliant on >>>> gasoline to shuttle clients and personnel around to sites for sale. >>>> >>>> Talk about addicts. >>>> >>>> >>> >>>Or a person that performs services in your home and relies on gasoline >>>to make a living. >>> >>>Addicts. Sheesh! >> >>Addicts in denial. Oil is a finite resource. > > So is oxygen. Want to stop using it? I love it when right wingers get up on their hind legs and try and make scientifical noises at me. Oxygen is a renewable resource. As reactive as it is, it has to be or it would vanish into rust in a few thousand years. Would you like to hazard a guess as to where the new oxygen comes from?
From: 5440 Dead, 573 since 1/20/09 on 9 May 2010 00:00 On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:26:58 -0500, Matthew Russotto wrote: > In article <8J5En.344637$K81.303465(a)newsfe18.iad>, lil abner > <@daisey.mae> wrote: > >>If they bring our economy to a screeching halt and ban all automobiles, >>air conditioners, and power plants pollution will not be reduced by 20% >>or whatever magic number they pull out of the air. > > No, it would be reduced by more like 80-90%. As would the population. > Wouldn't last long, though; the Chinese would love to have the real > estate. Well, you're correct: all the worlds' economies would completely crash, as would the human population. I would love to know why you think China would be spared. Don't they use gasoline, too? And of course, that's why NOBODY is talking about stopping internal combustion immediately. Except hysterical right wingers who want to frighten the teabaggers, of course.
From: Matthew Russotto on 9 May 2010 14:13
In article <kvydnaTd4YIGr3vWnZ2dnUVZ_vY6AAAA(a)posted.carinet>, 5440 Dead, 573 since 1/20/09 <dead(a)dead.com> wrote: >On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:37:52 -0500, Matthew Russotto wrote: > >> In article <i1j3u5p24l28lbq70sns2dk1an2dbbs14f(a)4ax.com>, 5440 Dead, 573 >> since 1/20/09 <zeppp(a)finestplanet.com> wrote: >>>On Wed, 5 May 2010 12:00:41 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" >>><crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>"Conscience" <nobama@göv.com> wrote in message >>>>news:hrqjpn$835$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>> On 2010-05-04 18:17:51 -0700, Phlip <phlip2005(a)gmail.com> said: >>>>> >>>>>> On May 4, 4:45 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Do I feel guilty? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, I do not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Without regard to any other energy source, America needs oil. >>>>>> >>>>>> Witness how emasculated the addict feels if he thinks his source is >>>>>> threatened. >>>>> >>>>> Seriously. >>>>> >>>>> Imagine, for example, a real estate business completely reliant on >>>>> gasoline to shuttle clients and personnel around to sites for sale. >>>>> >>>>> Talk about addicts. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>Or a person that performs services in your home and relies on gasoline >>>>to make a living. >>>> >>>>Addicts. Sheesh! >>> >>>Addicts in denial. Oil is a finite resource. >> >> So is oxygen. Want to stop using it? > >I love it when right wingers get up on their hind legs and try and make >scientifical noises at me. > >Oxygen is a renewable resource. As reactive as it is, it has to be or it >would vanish into rust in a few thousand years. Renewable is not the opposite of finite. Unlimited is the opposite of finite. Very little is unlimited; the second law of thermodynamics assures that. So blathering about how oil is a finite resource and implying that therefore we shouldn't rely on it is nonsense; we have no choice but to depend on finite resources, because that is all there is. If you want to argue that oil will run out SOON, that's a different matter. But that can't be established by simply pointing out that oil is finite. -- The problem with socialism is there's always someone with less ability and more need. |