Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brucelee
The cost Jim, is not insignificant, not known, will not be voluntarily borne, will not be borne equally. Every resource that is devoted to alleviating a harm that is not agreed upon, is not measurable, and it quite possibly, not real, COULD be devoted to those things that we know are quite real.
For example, it is estimated that the cost of fighting this so-called distaster is in excess of what it would cost to eliminate drought and hunger from the continent of Africa.
What is interesting is that we can't get anyone enrolled in discussing THAT trade off at all.
Death by starvation is a KNOWN and measurable DISASTER yet Al Gore is nowhere on that one. Rather, his movie on a possible problem has made him a star!
Complete with a heated swimming pool and a private jet.
Do what I say, not what I do.
Sorry, I have been lied to by his type too many times to be taken again.
|
Bruce,
Don't you think your arguments are a little extreme? I mean
eliminate drought and hunger from the continent of Africa??? We're not doing that now so it seems a Non Sequitur for me.
But, this is an example of what I meant when I said it was an emotional and devisive issue. There
may be a problem, I don't know, in fact I don't think anyone can say for sure.
But, isn't that the point? Shouldn't we be exploring and confirming the Science rather than trying to end the argument in one fell swoop by stating that we're gonna Doom Africa to Starvation and Drought? I just don't think these types of hysterical arguments are germane to settling the issue.
A 20% increase in Range was achieved by a semi Full-Court press during the Ford Administration and we all came through relatively unscathed. Where would be the harm of furthering our understanding and engineering of IC in an effort to increase Range?
No matter which way the argument on Global Warming finally swung, we'd have derived some benefit...
Happy Motoring!... Jim'99