It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: beezzer
Well Beez there are alternatives if you care to look.
This is what gets me there seems to be this holler about cost and taxes when we are talking about cleaning up things yet many of those same people(I am not saying you are one this is just in general) are more than willing to fight for a pipeline through the country to create 50 to 100 permanent jobs which will cost us 7 billion dollars. Where is the outrage over that.
So it really is the co2 you are worried about. Why didn't you say that on the Keystone Pipeline thread then instead of pretending it was more about whether or not it will be financially helpful to the country? Never mind, I think I know the answer. You have just proved to me how right I am with your post here.
By the way, did you know that more jobs equals higher tax revenues? Who would have thunk it. But it is outrageous to expect people to pay taxes for supposedly fighting Climate Change. I'm guessing the money would be spent on campaigns to sack the coal and natural gas industry.
originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Grimpachi
Pollution is a problem. I like clean water and air.
Alternative power sources are wonderful. Lets make an electric car that is affordable.
I like the idea of solar power, wind power.
I enjoy the idea of being self-sufficient with my power requirements.
I like to hunt and fish. I want healthy food for me and mine.
But what we are talking about is taxing people to "off-set" existing "carbon expenditures" or some other such clap-trap!
Make an affordable electric car!
I'll be first in line to buy one! I'm in the process of building a home. Geo-thermal heating and cooling and am looking at wind power for energy.
But what I won't have. . . is a politician pissing on my leg and tell me it's raining!
originally posted by: BlueMule
Am I the only "liberal" who suspects that the "conservative" position regarding climate change revolves around their fear for their wallet?
originally posted by: xuenchen
originally posted by: BlueMule
Am I the only "liberal" who suspects that the "conservative" position regarding climate change revolves around their fear for their wallet?
LOL
And perhaps rightly so.
originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: Astrocyte
Our fossil fuel burning has very little effect when compared with the volcanic activity of nature. C02 isn't warming the globe or the temperature here would not be 42 In May. The AGW people know it and that is why they had to change it from GLobal Warming to Climate Change. Cmon, be logical here.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: lostbook
If our government in the US wanted to stop global CO2 emissions, they could do it right now. BUt they aren't. Which tells me to revert to scenario #2: this is all just a new way to screw us out of more money.
I say that Ill make changes when I see people in power making change. Lead by example. Otherwise, looks like we are all going to hell together.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
if obama, et al, are worried about this, then why aren't they doing something about it? The US Military is exempt from all these environmental regulations. If "they" want me to believe "them", then it starts with the US military, who is among the worst polluters in the world.
Ill make all the changes needed to do my part. But them first.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
my point is, i am a molecule of water in a wave that is mostly made up of government entities and corporations. To ask me to bend over is asking me to take a sacrifice that will have no meaning other than to increase my level of discomfort.
If Obama wants my support, he damned well better come prepared with more than, "You need to cut carbon". He best clean his own yard before complaining about my weeds.
I should add: further, there is no credibility in an argument made by people not willing to heed their own argument. This feels like a tax grab, plain and simple.
originally posted by: beezzer
So this will be a justification in raising taxes without any actual concrete alternatives?
How much is this "doom" going to cost me?
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: amazing
A climate scientist can postulate a theory that excess carbon dioxide discharges from the burning of fossil fuels is a) a harmless variation in a millenia of such variations OR b) armegeddon and the doom of all mankind
Theory A - does not provide further grant and research money
Theory B - generates millions in grant and research money
What does Occam' Razor tell you about which theory the scientist is more likely to want to explore?
Tired of Control Freaks
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Greven
if obama, et al, are worried about this, then why aren't they doing something about it? The US Military is exempt from all these environmental regulations. If "they" want me to believe "them", then it starts with the US military, who is among the worst polluters in the world.
Ill make all the changes needed to do my part. But them first.