scrambler Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 "Clearly, this shift away from an oil-based industry will have huge ramifications—politically as well as environmentally. Energy is the world’s biggest business, generating nearly 2 trillion dollars a year, and the way we use energy now is the single most destructive thing we do to our planet. The key to sustainable development lies in the clean use of energy and POWER TO THE PEOPLE shows us how today’s energy revolution promises just that." "He cuts through the rhetoric of the right and the left and finds the ideas he believes will really work—such as free markets working together with environmental goals—and profiles quirky and visionary players from all sides. The planet-saving ideas he reports on are far from idealists' whims. They are supported by the likes of Ford, GE, Motorola, Shell Oil, BP, the US Army, and Presidents Bush and Clinton, as well as environmentalists." Power to the People: How the Coming Energy Revolution Will Transform an Industry, Change Our Lives, and Maybe Save the Planet BTW, any of you read Jeremy Rifkin's stuff? I thought his shit was revolutionary at the time. Quote
ScottP Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 "the single most destructive thing we do to our planet" I've got to differ with them on this one. IMO the the single most destructive thing we do to our planet is procreate. Quote
scott_harpell Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 in terms of money "defense" kicks the shit out of energy i would assume given the money just the U.S. spends a year. Quote
scrambler Posted November 18, 2003 Author Posted November 18, 2003 ScottP said: "the single most destructive thing we do to our planet" I've got to differ with them on this one. IMO the the single most destructive thing we do to our planet is procreate. Yeah, sheer size of population and continued growth. But I believe that an energy-intensive standard of living is more influential. If we didn't have modern medicine and other benefits of our standard of living then population would be self-regulating. Our standard of living requires an enormous amount of energy to produce and transport goods, etc. And with each consumer innovation, the use of energy increases, e.g., look at the additional consumer electronic goods you use compared to thirty years ago. There was an economist named Dr. Julian Simon formerly of Univ. of Maryland, who won a famous bet with Dr. Paul Ehrich concerning population growth and the state of the world. I tend to side with Simon with regard to future state of the world and population size if we develop technology to help solve the problems. Case in point: the Green Revolution in agriculture--development of hardy strains of wheat helped feed the millions who were predicted to perish in third world countries. So, yeah, the proper expansion of the use of technology guided by the foresight of politicians, research scientists, academicians, etc. Ok, so that's utopian but I think we can increase carrying capacity through wiser use of water resources, development of new food products, etc. Plus, a country with a high growth rate fostered by a young population is an economic boon. Some have said that overcrowding leads to violence and deviant social behavior. As far as extrapolating social effects from rat behavior due to crowding, I don't believe that the study is definitive. Just like the story about the lemmings, it could turn out to be wrong or just not applicable to humans. Humans are very adaptable. Maybe impose some control over population growth through family planning programs but overall do not impose draconian measures on other people's reproductive freedom. So, controlled growth and expanded use of technology to meet the world's needs. The technological application of science will include the use of alterative energy. Quote
joe_average Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 The single biggest influence? BOLTS! Quote
Thinker Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 The single biggest influence on the planet is time. I suspect the next ice age or plague will more than compensate for human overpopulation, GWB, over development, pollution, and yes, even bolts. It's just a matter of time until it happens. Quote
lummox Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 water. that is the single biggest influence on the planet. Quote
David_Parker Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 ScottP said: IMO the the single most destructive thing we do to our planet is procreate. Along these lines, I nominate the Pope. A paradigm shift within the Catholic church towards birthcontrol would be simply........HUGE! Quote
lI1|1! Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 the sun's gravity. like duh, without it we would fly aimlessly through the galaxy. i win! Quote
allthumbs Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 There's only ONE correct answer you douche-bags ... SEX DRIVES THIS WORLD ... you're foolish to believe otherwise. Quote
David_Parker Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 lI1|1! said: the sun's gravity. like duh, without it we would fly aimlessly through the galaxy. i win! Gotta admit, you win. But wait, what if the earth was flying aimlessly through space. Maybe there wouldn't be life, but what does the planet care? Quote
scrambler Posted November 18, 2003 Author Posted November 18, 2003 (edited) Here's your fucking prize!!! Edited November 18, 2003 by scrambler Quote
lI1|1! Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 David_Parker said: lI1|1! said: the sun's gravity. like duh, without it we would fly aimlessly through the galaxy. i win! Gotta admit, you win. But wait, what if the earth was flying aimlessly through space. Maybe there wouldn't be life, but what does the planet care? the lifeless planet earth would still care because without it's current gravitational mooring it would eventually get sucked into a black hole and have all it's atoms compressed into a volume of a couple teaspoons. Quote
minx Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 where do i get that wrapping paper???? seriously.... Quote
David_Parker Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 lI1|1! said: David_Parker said: lI1|1! said: the sun's gravity. the lifeless planet earth would still care because without it's current gravitational mooring it would eventually get sucked into a black hole and have all it's atoms compressed into a volume of a couple teaspoons. /quote] But again, does the planet care how big it is? Does size really matter? Maybe Trask wins...it IS about sex! Quote
scrambler Posted November 18, 2003 Author Posted November 18, 2003 (edited) minx said: where do i get that wrapping paper???? seriously.... Here's the link to the news story. Gary Cohen runs http://www.tshirthell.com/ . Take a look at his T-shirts. Here's the deep link if you're in a hurry. Edited November 18, 2003 by scrambler Quote
AlpineK Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 Dude check out the elves shoving the christmas tree up santa's ass. Quote
bunglehead Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 lI1|1! said: the sun's gravity. like duh, without it we would fly aimlessly through the galaxy. i win! And the sun's warmth! Dig on the rays, bra. Quote
lI1|1! Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 AlpineK said: Dude check out the elves shoving the christmas tree up santa's ass. so is that an old tree cutter downer joke? a fun way tree cutters haze the newby? some special memories there kurt? you can tell us. Quote
E-rock Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 (edited) David_Parker said: ScottP said: IMO the the single most destructive thing we do to our planet is procreate. Along these lines, I nominate the Pope. A paradigm shift within the Catholic church towards birthcontrol would be simply........HUGE! The first nation in the world to attain zero population growth was Italy. Furthermore, catholic population is quite low compared to other world religions. Edited November 18, 2003 by E-rock Quote
iain Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 e-rock your avatar image is misleading. I believe an alternative definition of the hot karl is filling a sock with freshiez and swinging it at victim while shouting "hot karl"! run away at top speed while victim remains incapacitated. similar, but not quite the same as "the emeril" BAM! Quote
E-rock Posted November 18, 2003 Posted November 18, 2003 The original definition of the "Hot Karl" as described to me by an old girlfriend was pooing on the face of a partner with plastic wrap shielding the face. I've learned since then that this is sometimes called a "vegetarian hot lunch" as a opposed to a "hot lunch" (sans plastic wrap). I have also heard that the "Hot Karl" is insertion of "poopy dick" into the mouth of a partner. I have never heard your elaborate grade-school-esque definition of the "Hot Karl" before. Please read up on fecal erotica and stop believing what your friends tell you at the lunch table. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.