Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MNBoxster
@Berj,
This exchange is pointless. I will never persuade you because you simply will not accept the fundamental concept of my argument, namely, that an ineffective solution is no solution, only wasted effort. In 30 years, we have not reduced the levels of pollution, it has gone up! Admittedly, some CO were reduced, but the overall effect is an increase in the pollution, not a decrease.
The argument that it would have been worse without some measures is like a Politician arguing that money not spent is money saved. It's not saved at all, it is just not spent, there is a fundamental difference.
You must act as your conscience guides you.
Happy Motoring!...Jim'99
|
You're probably right.. but.. one last thing from my end and that will be that (with no hard feelings.. promise
)
You're missing something when you say that even with 30 years of efforts polution has gone up (though in some places this isn't true.. but be that as it may).. it's all about rates.. it may have gone up but it certainly didn't go up as fast as it might have otherwise. And that counts for something. Finite (and damaging) resources consumed more slowly -- that's a good thing (TM) and a good start in my books. Obviously you see it differently.
And you're right.. I won't accept that the various efforts (obviously some more effective than others) we make are wasted. The more we try the more likely we are to find one that really works.
Peace out! I'm going for a drive
