Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon+May 12 2005, 03:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ May 12 2005, 03:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by HOZ@May 12 2005, 03:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon@May 11 2005, 10:41 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Looger
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
@May 11 2005, 10:35 PM
being against kyoto seems to make people think you're anti-environment
|
Where there's smoke, there's fire.
I think the biggest issue pro-Kyoto advocates would point out is that the anti-Kyoto crowd doesn't seem to have a better solution. Doing nothing is generally frowned upon as a 'solution' to human impact on the planet.
If the anti-Kyoto crowd wants to defeat Kyoto AND not look like environment-bashing cash-grubbers, they need to come up with their own comprehensive solution. Are anti-Kyoto people honestly surprised that they're condemned as anti-environment? They're great at pointing out the problems, but I don't see many solutions.
Don't we all love the person who's great at pointing out the problem, but doesn't put forward their own idea? I know I do.
|
What a very closed minded statement!
If a guy needs his leg amputated due to gangrene and a person offers up the solution of using a doublebarrelled shotgun to perform the operation. It hardly takes a rocket scientist to figure out that that is a bad idea and everyone should try and come up with a different idea...even if one is not readily available at the time.
The money that will be thrown away on Kyoto can be put into R&D while we think of a better idea. With maglev technology and such we can already travel faster and cleaner. What we need is to make it economically viable.
|
I hear you.
A guy has a gangrenous leg, and I'm suggesting a double-barrelled shotgun. Fair enough, I'll accept that analogy. It should be noted that there are no saws, amputation devices, or even other guns around. There's the one shotgun, and the one leg. That's it.
Would it be messy? Sure. It would also save the patient's life. Letting the leg rot and rot until the guy dies, while claiming to be 'looking for other solutions' is bogus.
Where's your solution? What do you have that's better than my 'double-barrelled shotgun'? I think you've got one dead man, of gangrene, because you can't stomach the only current, available option.
Instead of shouting at me to put down the gun, why don't you go get a saw? Maybe you're too close-minded... [/b][/quote]
Simply the choices are
A: the man eventually dies from gangrene while we look for a better solution
B: blow the mans leg off with the shotgun and hope he immediately doesn't die of shock/blood loss
C: Someone comes up with a far better idea before he dies
Since the Earth's situation is nowhere near as dire as our gangrene patient then A and C can be combined.
Kyoto is a shotgun to the body of any economy. The country implementing it will be bled dry. Either paying billions or cutting industry (ie jobs) to meet their "quota"
If Canada was really serious about it, there wouldn't be any Ontario loopholes. And really, if Canada was willing to put in loopholes how many other countries would put in loopholes to give themselves a boost?
Especially when the biggest and soon-to-be biggest economies are not involved!