Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (17936)	12/2/2007 8:07:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

I do admit to sometimes including ideas that are meant to be not serious. Unless people read for meaning and figure things out for themselves, they would have difficulty deciding which is which. Also, sometimes, or perhaps it's usually, ideas are just for consideration rather than as finished works. Life is too complex to be absolutely sure about much, so it's worth considering lots of things. For example, the Greenhouse Effect might be a serious worry of gargantuan proportions. I'm not denying that. What I do think is that I haven't seen sufficient information to make me think it's as serious as people say it is. When they get hysterical about 450ppm looming half a century from now, and that's very far below previous levels of CO2, it's hard to get too excited. We are not up to 400 ppm yet and that'll take a while yet. Lots can happen before we get there. Greensters worry about all sorts of things which to me are totally trivial, such as recycling plastic bags, bottles, cans, paper and stuff. I quite like huge middens. I'd like to see a kilometre high rubbish mountain. It would be an excellent viewing place for a start. And recreation place. When they go off the rails about thing which are obviously stupid, they lack credibility with things like CO2. Especially when my understanding seems a LOT better than theirs. We have a recycling religion in New Zealand. We all had stupid little blue bins, with people collecting it in little wagons, blocking traffic, getting injured and two were killed, because the process was so hazardous, costing a LOT of money, leaving rubbish and broken glass around the place. Now it seems that it wasn't a good idea after all - well, Duh! So they are going to go back to big bins like we previously had. So there was a huge waste of effort. They are going to adopt my idea of a decade or two ago that it's best to take it all to a sorting place where the job can be done safely, cheaply, more completely, and might even make money. Unemployed people could be given the sorting job. We'd soon find out who is genuinely unemployed when they all have to show up to work sorting the rubbish on a piece work basis. We also have a tree religion. People worship trees, especially native trees. There is huge cost, many laws, court cases and drama over trees. Trees used to grow happily. People planted them galore. Now to avoid being caught in the legal morass, we have to cut trees down while they are small and definitely exterminate any natives which pop out of the ground, because the trees own the property they manage to get hold of. People will be killed by falling trees and electricity supplies will be off for weeks when we get another storm come through. I hope that the people killed are the children of a tree-hugger law maker and enforcer, not innocent people. That would be karma. That would be a lot better than other people losing their children's lives to a falling tree. Greensters, being innumerate and scientifically illiterate, are not good at counting costs. We don't see much, if anything, about the cost to the world of CO2 reduction. They don't say how many early deaths and how much suffering will be caused by CO2 controls. Mqurice