Quote:
Originally Posted by bronco67
Ok...does this inarticulate gibberish sound like the thoughts of an informed, intelligent person? Can you answer that question directly with a yes or no answer?
Saying either yes or no won't support your obligatory contrarian devil's advocate position which you take in every argument, so I'm expecting you to talk around it.
|
He's not addressing the intelligent. He's going after the "Common Man" vote. They see every attempt to limit them speeding up global warming as an infringement on their rights. The US is the biggest consumer and the biggest polluter, be that in China where they produce goods for the world.
We're losing rain forest at an unsustainable rate, ploughing up fields and concreting the areas, reproducing at a rate that means billions will starve to death, losing wildlife at an unprecedented rate. The debate is over, Man is assisting the Natural World to make the coming disaster more lethal.
Saw a program recently about Las Vegas running out of water. Instead of turning off the fountains, consuming less water, putting up the price, etc. They proposed they build more but smaller dams upstream. Which will mean even less flows through the system.
Lake Mead and others are stark evidence of what Man is doing.
Rain Forest loss.
Droughts.
But don't worry a city in the Desert is still keeping the fountains on.