Thursday, May 28, 2009

Lefty/Righty Part II: The Environment

This is sort of a sequel to my recent post "Lefty" or "Righty."

In the comments on that post, Red asks me what my stance on the global warming debate was. I told him that an issue of this magnitude deserved more than just a little comment and would do up a post devoted entirely to it. So here it is.

In regards to 'global warming' or 'climate change' or whatever it is it is called these days, I do think that the world's weather patterns are changing for the worse. There are more earthquakes, more hurricanes, more tornadoes, etc...than there ever have been in history (and to be honest, that fact might even be up for debate).

I do not think, however, that these changing weather patterns are completely man made. In fact, I think the percentage of blame that falls on humankind is relatively small.

I do, however, think that mankind in general is not taking care of their environment.

People really do need to recycle more. We are eventually going to run out of our natural resources and we as a people need to be aware of that fact.

More cities around the country should institute car pool lanes on the freeway as an effort to promote carpooling and to help reduce carbon emissions at least a little bit.

As for Al Gore. Well, I have seen the movie 'An Inconvenient Truth.' It is quite compelling. And I do agree that some of what he has to say is true. But not everything. I think a lot of it is scare tactics based on what he says is scientific research.

However, that scientific research is not necessarily reliable. Remember back in the 60s when 'scientific research' proved the magic bullet theory in the JFK assassination? I don't buy that either.

I think we do need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Actually, I will go even further than that. We need to reduce (not eliminate, just reduce) our dependence on oil in general.

We need to find cheaper, alternate, more environmentally friendly, sources of energy. However, we need to perform the necessary research to guarantee that these alternate sources of energy are reliable. It is all well and good to invent some car that runs exclusively on solar energy but if the thing only goes 30 mph that isn't efficient.

But we should research things like solar energy, wind energy and nuclear energy.

We should give generous incentives to automobile manufacturers that build cars like hybrid vehicles. Those have proven efficient and environmentally friendly.

Should we allow drilling in Alaska? Yes and no. Allow drilling but do not give the oil companies free rein. Don't just turn them loose to drill whenever and wherever they want. It needs to be controlled so that the wildlife and other natural resources in the area are not affected. And I think that control should be left up to the STATE of Alaska. NOT the federal government.

I'm not what one would call an outright tree hugger but I do respect my environment and think it should be protected.

But at the same time I think that many liberals take the issue of global warming too far. They are trying to appeal to the less intelligence of our species and con them into thinking it is all our fault that the environment is screwed.

Sure we screwed up our environment. But certainly not to the extent the climate change wackos seem to think we have.

The interesting thing is that even with all the damage that has been done. The planet is fine. There is nothing wrong with the planet. The planet isn't going anywhere.....WE ARE!!! LoL!

But really. Some things just happen. Some things are just part of the natural order of things. Perhaps it is just the way God made the planet. Maybe it was designed from the beginning to eventually start to break down.

I dunno. It's just a theory.

So on this particular political issue I think I would fall somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum but leaning slightly (very slightly) to the right.


  1. Yup... the fact you would poke one more hole in the mother earth and suck the life blood right out of her via Alaska pretty much makes you a righty my friend... but I told you that when you forgot to include Global Warming... errr Climate Change... ahem, cough cough... "our deteriorating atmosphere" in your original post on left/right.

    BTW- We HAVE been trying to develop alternative fuels for well over 30 years now steve... since the 1970's. But the fact is we might as well be trying to get water from a rock.

    We have known about solar for decades and it hasn't gotten any better or more efficient now than it was then...

    We have known about wind power, turbines, generators etc for decades and even though there are huge wind farms across the country, they only produce a small fraction of the power (at a higher cost) than a single hydro-electric dam or coal fired plant can.

    We have known about ethanol from corn etc for decades and it hasn't gotten any better or cheaper or efficient now than it was then...

    We have known about bio-diesel, propane and a host of other possible fuels for decades and they are no better now than they ever were and still not cost effective on a large scale.

    We have known a about nuclear power for decades, but a nuclear powered Ford is not in your near future.

    Nothing performs like petroleum. It has powered America to the forefront of technology and advancement and convenience... so of course the left has wanted to eliminate it since since the late 60's.

    Other animals have a far greater impact on the planet than man... the planet has the ability to heal itself and outlive civilizations.

    This "climate crisis" is a power grab and nothing more. The weatherman (science) can't even tell you what it's gonna do an hour from now... much less predict years ahead.

  2. Red --
    There is as much power grabbing by the anti-environmental crowd as there is by the environmental crowd. "Your side" on this issue is not righteous at all.

    Steve --
    Very well said and I agree with many of your point. Good show my friend.

  3. Red, I'm just not sure that my stance on environmental issues would make me completely a righty. Like I said in the post, at most I would say it would put me in the middle leaning slightly to the right.
    On the basis of environmental issues that is. Not overall.

    The reason I think these alternative energy forms have not gotten more efficient or less expensive is because I honestly don't think enough research is being conducted on them. I think if the government would give some assistance in funding the research we could probably get further with it.

    As for petroleum. I don't want to outright eliminate it. I just think we would all be better off by using other forms of energy and not use petroleum-based energy exclusively. I am just concerned that we will eventually run out and then what? No more oil? We would be screwed.

    And you are right Red. I don't trust a weatherman as far as I can throw him..or her.

  4. Give me an example of this so-called "anti-environment crowd" first of all... I (and other conservatives) care about the environment as much as anyone.
    We just don't buy into the false science hoax of manmade climate change.

    Next give me an example of exactly how the so-callled "anti-environment crowd" is using false claims about the environment to legislate control over your life as you said they do.

    The right is for "choice" dave not using a phony crisis to legislate what you drive, when you drive it, where you drive it, what color what you drive is, what you eat, how you heat and cool your home, how you illuminate your home, etc etc etc.

    I'm calling BS on the claim that those of us who don't believe in manmade global warming are "anti-environment"... and BS on the claim that those of us who don't believe in manmade global warming are somehow using this to "grab power"

  5. The "anti-environment crowd"?


  6. Such respectfulness Red. You are a gentleman and a scholar.

    How about the ones that block wildlife preserves in favor of development (for any multitude of things)? Generally that boils down to some company wanting to build something/somewhere but the building of said thing will disrupt the habitat of a specific species of animal (often endangered). Those in the pocketbook of the company push for the allowance of the project to go forward. Those are the folks who put money over the environment.

    The fact that you REFUSE to take an honest look at those who oppose environment initiatives just proves, yet again, that your philosophy is the holy and righteous one and everyone else sucks. What a crock. Just like in the Israel / Palestine situation, there are no good guys here. Sure there are some well intentioned people on this issue who just truly want what is best for the world (Bill Nye comes to mind) but both sides of this issue are filled with power hungry control, self-involved, and self-important politicians, activists, and actors. NO ONE IS ABOVE REPROACH RED!!!

  7. Yes, we oppose "environmental issues" when those issues are phony, made-up lies designed to ram the liberal agenda down our throats without question or review.

    When those on the left care more about a rat (or mouse) than whether humans have drinking water or not... you bet we oppose it.

    You on the left believe that just because you tag the word "environment" on something we are supposed to bend over and just take it without question.

    This is what Obama is doing right now with this carbon tax crap.

    Give me an example dave, not just random possibilities... when and where did conservatives block preserving wildlife... if you will check your facts, it is the left who is doing the blocking.

    You could go out in the middle of the desert and want to build a beautiful lake and the left would protest it and stop it because it might damage the sand... and at the same time they would cry fowl at the right for destroying the beautiful desert.

    Give me a break.... if the left had there way then humans would be banned from the planet.

  8. You know what Red? I’m done with you. You are nothing more than a loud mouthed bully who treats anyone who disagrees with you like shit. When someone calls you on you’re a-hole tendencies you either try to blow it off or you rip into that person even harder, usually with personal attacks. You have nothing positive or worthwhile to offer society (or at least you have nothing positive or worthwhile to offer in your online persona…I have a feeling that you’re not as big of a dick in person as you are online). I have defended you against some ridiculous attacks and still you treat me like dirt. You have wasted my time for over three years now and I am completely fed up. If you can stop acting like a cock-bag then I’d love to have actual discussion with you.

    The really frustrating thing about all of this Red is that I actually like you. If I didn’t I would have written you off as a joke years ago. You can be a nice guy, but those instances are few and far between and I just do have the time, energy, patients, or nerves to put up with this bullshit anymore. I do wish you the best of luck and hope that someday we can interact like adults but that time doesn’t seem to be now (heck…I’ve been reduced to throwing curse words at you directly and that is not my style but you really have pushed me over the edge).

    My apologizes to everyone for my foul language.

  9. Hey dave... you just copied what you wrote over at my blog over here.

    Not sure what I said to make you so mad, but you are the one that called me part of some kind of "anti-environmental" conspiracy. All I did was ask you about info about it.

    Anyway, so what is a "cock-bag" and is that worse than an "anti-environmentalist"?

    Gee, lighten up man, for real.

  10. I copied that comment here because it was your comments on this post and on the post on your blog that set me off. Also I was sure if you'd approve the comment on your blog since I went off so bad and used some choice words.