• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Hmm... probably not good (Global warming)

Thief

Rogue Theologian
the ice caps are shrinking
dumping fresh water into the water flow

that slows the cycle and speed of sea water as the oceans do circle the globe

that's not good
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
a human can live on one acre of ground if the crop does not fail

a cow needs three acres
and five years to produce meat
 

ecco

Veteran Member


I see you are still shilling for the conservatives. Here is the Mission Statement of the site for your linked/quoted article:

Our Mission
Nature and Prosperity for All
Environmental Progress (EP) was founded to achieve two goals: lift all humans out of poverty, and save the natural environment. These goals can be achieved by mid-century — but only if we remove the obstacles to cheap, reliable and clean energy.​

Yep. Let's all do more franking. Or Nuking...

Shellenberger has been a climate and environmental activist for over 30 years. He has helped save nuclear reactors around the world, from Illinois and New York to South Korea and Taiwan,
I wonder if he also solved the problem of disposal of nuclear waste?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I see you are still shilling for the conservatives.
Hoo boy! That was fast & loud.
Way to entirely misunderstand both my intent and
the article. And straight to the angry ad hom too.

Calm down.
Read the article.
Then draw conclusions.
And try to stick to the issues.
You'll suffer less embarrassment.

Nuclear power is favored by many who want to reduce CO2 emissions.
I'm not a fan, but I understand their reasoning.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Hoo boy! That was fast & loud.

It was neither fast nor loud. I don't know about fast (how can one tell) but if I wanted to be loud, I would have written:
I see you are still shilling for the conservatives.

Way to entirely misunderstand both my intent and
the article. And straight to the angry ad hom too.

Misunderstand? Nah. And what ad home? That I pointed out the credentials of the author of the article? Sorry if you don't think it's fair to understand the source of "information". I think it's vital.

Calm down.
I am always calm.
Did you somehow think you saw my face turning red in anger? It didn't.
Did you somehow think you heard me cussing at that $#**% Rev fellow? I didn't.
Did you misinterpret my pointing out facts as anger? It wasn't- it isn't.

Read the article.
Then draw conclusions.

I read enough of it to draw a valid conclusion.

And try to stick to the issues.

The issue was the article you referenced.

You'll suffer less embarrassment.

Funny. I admit I'm a proponent of liberal causes. Some people pretend to be one thing but then make posts that show differently. They are the ones who should be embarrassed.

Nuclear power is favored by many who want to reduce CO2 emissions.
I'm not a fan, but I understand their reasoning.

Actually, I'm was a fan of nukes too. Until I came to realize the immense dangers stemming from human and/or equimpment failure. Until I came to realize the immense long term dangers of disposing of nuclear wastes. Until I realized that there are better alternatives. We have only scratched the surface on the efficient use of solar.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I see you are still shilling for the conservatives.
A beginning strongly suggesting the rest isn't worth reading.
When you can avoid the personal abuse,
learn to read carefully & without presumption,
& engage me in interesting conversation, then
let me know. I'll gladly discuss issues.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
ecco said:
I see you are still shilling for the conservatives.



A beginning strongly suggesting the rest isn't worth reading.
When you can avoid the personal abuse,
learn to read carefully & without presumption,
& engage me in interesting conversation, then
let me know. I'll gladly discuss issues.


Now you have stooped to quoting me out of context. How low will you go?

You had accused me of being loud when obviously I wasn't. In response, I pointed out what being loud would have looked like:
It was neither fast nor loud. I don't know about fast (how can one tell) but if I wanted to be loud, I would have written:
I see you are still shilling for the conservatives.

Did you somehow miss the "if " in 'if I wanted to be loud, I would have written: I see you are still shilling for the conservatives.'

Of course, you didn't miss it. So, clearly you intentionally misrepresented what I said. First, you say I was being loud when I wasn't, then you intentionally quote me out of context. For shame.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Now you have stooped to quoting me out of context.
You're doing it again.
I stopped reading at this, least I reward rancor.
Context of what follows is irrelevant If I don't read it.
Be civil & interesting, or be ignored.
 

Tambourine

Well-Known Member
Yea, I doubt climate change will be a big deal for wealthy Whites.
They can always retreat back into their gated communities if things go sour for the rest of humanity,
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Yea, I doubt climate change will be a big deal for wealthy Whites.
They can always retreat back into their gated communities if things go sour for the rest of humanity,
Yes climate change is all about race.
Damn those rich white people, eh.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yea, I doubt climate change will be a big deal for wealthy Whites.
They can always retreat back into their gated communities if things go sour for the rest of humanity,
Don't underestimate the power of an irate populace.
Ask Louis XVI, or Nicholas II, or Mussolini.
 
Last edited:

Tambourine

Well-Known Member
Don't underestimate the power of an irate populace.
Ask Louis VI, or Nicholas II, or Mussolini.
But those are things for their children or grandchildren to worry about, once they can no longer afford to properly pay their security detail.
 
Top