Subject:
|
Re: Finally--a use of public funding that I can really get behind!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 19 Aug 2003 19:33:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
565 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
|
Whereas Im not chicken little who believes that if we dont start
recycling every single item and stop driving cars right now the earth is
going to spontaneously die in the very near future, you cant sit there and
say that the weather patterns over the last 10-15 years arent troubling.
|
And Im not a moron who believes that nothing we do on this planet affects the
world, or that we should only think of next week instead of next year, next
century, next decade, which is another reason that Im not a complete
libertarian. People can make bad choices, and society should do its part to
keep them from having long-lasting effects to others.
|
From my grandfather to my lifetime, where I live has experienced a season
called Winter. Even when I was young there would be snow on the ground
from late Nov/early Dec to Marchish. Im only 36, but I noticed a change in
the seasons--winters consist of a few days of snow storms followed by
unseasonably warm temeratures in which all that snow disappears.
|
Ah, so youre wishing for a return to an idealized past, eh? And therefore... a
conservative! Burn him! :)
|
See, its the unseasonable temperatures that should get the concern going.
I mean once or twice is a unique phenomenon, but every winter is getting
warmer. Sure it could be a natural cycle of the earth, but aggravating it
just doesnt do a wee bit of good!
|
You make very good points. Its like my argument about the economy--its a
natural cycle (for instance, Greenland was arable land several hundred years
ago), but we shouldnt aggravate it.
I believe that conservatives should also believe in conserving--including nature
(its intellectual dishonesty not to). To me, this means wise use, whether its
limiting chemicals in the water, selective deer hunting, or planned logging.
For example, if the oil reserves in the ANWR can be drilled with minimal impact
to the environment, do it, if not, stay the heck out.
I deplore the global warming alarmists who wont admit that there might be other
possibilities besides human impact on climate, and wont accept the argument
that they might be wrong (but we should be careful just in case). A good
example of those are the anti-SUV crusaders. Two good examples showing that are
that many SUVs carry larger number of passengers and hence get better mileage
per passenger--why encourage carpooling and disparage vehicles capable of doing
it?--and that most new SUVs pollute less than 10-year-old cars.
Just my 0.02.
|
And there are alotta bald hills in BC where the hiking is not so beautiful.
I wonder if the lumber companies would have cut out the clear cutting on
their own, or did those dastardly govt regulations twist their arms such
that they had to adopt better logging practices?
|
Im sorry for you. BCs got so much beautiful green land, too.
Honestly, I dont know what caused it--I just know that around here (Tennessee)
the lumber companies are among the most responsible people imaginable for what
they do to the environment.
I think a large part of it is simply that the companies own the land, and feel
obligated to care for it because its a thing of value to them. Its easy to
ruin the land when the government owns it (which is a good argument against
logging public lands; many EPA Superfund sites are ones that the government owns
and let companies scourge) but hard when its yours.
|
I have a spare bedroom for anyone in the LUGNET area who feels like jumping
ship from America up to Canada.
|
But how many LEGOs can it hold?
Best regards,
Carl
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|