SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (329895)3/22/2007 3:42:08 PM
From: Road Walker  Respond to of 1574882
 
re: JF has echoed that argument, pointing out that America consumes 25% of the world's oil production.

Which represents a huge opportunity, not an indictment.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (329895)3/22/2007 4:10:01 PM
From: Alighieri  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574882
 
Al, Ali Chen brought up the notion that the developing world (e.g. China and India) won't do a thing to prevent or slow down global warming.

I have heard this argument made repeatedly...among the many distractions keeping us from advancing, this is yet another. This is potentially the source of a new world economy...we can lead and help the globe or we can continue to snipe and argue about the credibility of the human contribution to global warming. I say, interesting, but sadly the right has made it a distraction that suppresses progress from the long overdue energy debate.

Read the exchange between AC and CJ for a pretty good example.

I agreed and pointed out what their rationale would be, that it's Americans who are burning more than their fair share of fossil fuels. JF has echoed that argument, pointing out that America consumes 25% of the world's oil production. And Ted himself said, "I see no reason why we shouldn't cut back on the burning of fossil fuel where its reasonable."

So yes, the implication is indeed that Americans ought to cut back. Alternative energy is good and all that, but until a viable "win-win" solution is proposed and driven through, Americans are still going to be seen as the main contributor to global warming.


This post is far more measured and pragmatic. I detected the typical right leaning tone in your prior post, and of course the ever present shot at the detractors' favorite target, Gore. I think the right in general has mocked this very critical topic to its detriment.

Al



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (329895)3/24/2007 3:42:46 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1574882
 
So yes, the implication is indeed that Americans ought to cut back. Alternative energy is good and all that, but until a viable "win-win" solution is proposed and driven through, Americans are still going to be seen as the main contributor to global warming.

I followed everything you were saying in your post until we got to his paragraph. Then you lost me. What you are saying in this paragraph doesn't make sense.