Debate discussion
Politics
>
The Environment?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Davis
(new)
Jun 24, 2009 08:59AM
Should we save it, or let it burn?
reply
|
flag
Mod
There are actually people on here that would say let it burn. "If god wants us to suffocate in greenhouse gasses than let me sign up!"We need alternative energy sources, and quickly, because within the next 100 years, 100% of our fossil fuels will be gone. What are we gunna do then?
There are people I've talked to who legit say 'God gave us the world, we can do what we want to it' hahahahaha, so fucking stupid.
Lauren wrote: "Natural selection has worked on the world for million upon millions of years. To kill it now is a travesty. "To let idiots who couldn't give a rats ass about the earth, because when the die they're going to heaven kill it is a travesty.
Mod
Some people still think Hurricane Katrina was God's will.
God hates black people and good food obviously.
Mod
Either way, it's just stupid.
Mod
I think it has something to do with the earth's natural cycle, but we are also doing a lot to harm the planet.
Liz wrote: "I think it has something to do with the earth's natural cycle, but we are also doing a lot to harm the planet. "So do you favor a cap and trade system and green energy?
I think we should save it because once its gone, its gone.
The Earth will survive without any human on it. That's a fact. When we talk about Environment, we actually talk about how can we, human being, survive the drastic changes on the Earth.
Exactly, that is truth. The planet will adapt as will other life on it, but we need to protect it for us!
Yep, If we don't save it, it will kill us.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/opi...If for nothing else than a fad, but also pollution induced deformities scare me.
The thing with humans is that they reach a point of change, but only on the precipice of a disaster. We all knew that someday the earth would reach a breaking point, but we never did anything. We knew car emissions were bad for the environment, along with other various common gases. However, we did nothing until information started coming on the news about Global Warming. However, even then, hardly anyone was making any change. People were still driving around instead of biking or walking or getting the extra exercise.
So I guess we'll just have to wait until something more drastic then Global Warming happens and then people will change. Because they haven't done much to change over the past few years when Global Warming became a reality. They only started to change things like cars, and people don't even buy those types of cars. They still go for the 'chick magnet' cars, the limousines, the Hummers, the muscle cars...
Therefore, humans will not change, regardless of if they know the environment is slowly dying or not. Only when the people start dying or getting physically affected, along with the earth, and at an extreme rate, only then will people start to change. And by then it will be too late. You can't fix the environment, but you can try to stop it from dying.
Basically what I'm saying is start cleaning up. Start biking, start walking, stop using plastic bags, stop throwing out plastic bottles, recycle more, etc. Do whatever you can to stop the environment, and eventually it's cruel people, from dying. Because indirectly, by hurting the environment, you're hurting yourself, your family, your friends, and all the other seven billion people on this earth.
So I guess we'll just have to wait until something more drastic then Global Warming happens and then people will change. Because they haven't done much to change over the past few years when Global Warming became a reality. They only started to change things like cars, and people don't even buy those types of cars. They still go for the 'chick magnet' cars, the limousines, the Hummers, the muscle cars...
Therefore, humans will not change, regardless of if they know the environment is slowly dying or not. Only when the people start dying or getting physically affected, along with the earth, and at an extreme rate, only then will people start to change. And by then it will be too late. You can't fix the environment, but you can try to stop it from dying.
Basically what I'm saying is start cleaning up. Start biking, start walking, stop using plastic bags, stop throwing out plastic bottles, recycle more, etc. Do whatever you can to stop the environment, and eventually it's cruel people, from dying. Because indirectly, by hurting the environment, you're hurting yourself, your family, your friends, and all the other seven billion people on this earth.
If each and every one of us change just one thing in our life, the one that we most of the time take for granted such as using reuseable lunch box instead of styrofoam food container, the impact on earth is huge. Never underestimate the Collective One Change. There are a lot of simple things that we can change if we care.
thnx liz!
and totally true Steven. :D
and totally true Steven. :D
I wrote this short essay a while ago. http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/4... I totally agree with you Serena. Too bad we cannot take a Nation like northern Belgium as a role model for environmentally safe living. They bike for their daily routes, grocery stores charge you money if you need your own plastic bags for the stuff you buy, (the canvas grocery bags are very common over there), and they somewhat scorn those who don't recycle.
It's not hard, it just hasn't been popular enough to make things accessible like recycling bins instead of one trash can for an area; or bicycle lanes on the streets, or reawakening of the rules of the road for bicyclers. It just needs some (a lot) of trailblazers to make these new notions fashionable.
Thanks Erik! Yes it is too bad... it's basically just a continuum of the American Dream.. Come to USA, live a great life, be rich, live rich.
It isn't hard! lol
It isn't hard! lol
lol thts y i sed i know :P
lolz
jkjk
lolz
jkjk
The fact of the matter is that we have been killing it for years, but it takes us to be affected by it for them to care. No one seemed to care until WE were affected.
It seems that for the most part the participants in this group are preaching to the choir. Is it simply the indefensible nature of conservatism that leads to most participants in this group being liberal or is it the fact that the liberals do not want to hear an alternative view and tend to abuse conservatives for their views?That aside, there is some middle ground, even from one who believes in God. I personally believe that even if God has given the world to humanity it has been given as a stewardship and we will be held accountable for being bad stewards. Therefore, my response to the initial question would be "we save it."
It seems that for the most part the participants in this group are preaching to the choir. Is it simply the indefensible nature of conservatism that leads to most participants in this group being liberal or is it the fact that the liberals do not want to hear an alternative view and tend to abuse conservatives for their views? How should we know why the people who don't participate in this group don't participate in it? We certainly don't want to frighten any conservatives off, as the group would be quite boring without them.
Dan,It was a rhetorical question. You commented:
"We certainly don't want to frighten any conservatives off, as the group would be quite boring without them."
And yet it has been my experience that once any one of the numerous liberals present perceives the demonic red pupils of their beady little eyes the backward conservative is met by derision and insult from multiple respondents. Yes, the atmosphere is quite conducive to respectful exchanges.
And yet it has been my experience that once any one of the numerous liberals present perceives the demonic red pupils of their beady little eyes the backward conservative is met by derision and insult from multiple respondents. Yes, the atmosphere is quite conducive to respectful exchanges. So what are you suggesting? That conservatives are inherently more polite than liberals? Or that conservatives are pansies who can't handle a challenge to their opinions?
Well I would reject both I think. Rather I would say that many of the liberals with whom I have interacted seem unable to carry on a respectful exchange. I think that many a concervative is more than will to be challenged as to their "opinions" but there is a big difference between demonstrating an argument to be fallacious and personally assaulting the author of the argument.
there is a big difference between demonstrating an argument to be fallacious and personally assaulting the author of the argument. But this has nothing to do with whether a person is liberal or conservative, so what's your point?
I believe I made it. Well, if you think you've made your point, then your point must be that some people on the planet are nicer than others, and there's not way to tell who's who unless you talk to them all. I should write that one down. That's a gem.
Lauren wrote: "Natural selection has worked on the world for million upon millions of years. To kill it now is a travesty. "Your totally right lauren it would be a travesty but hardly anyone in this universe cares!
I think we should save it. I mean we caused this mess and now we have to clean it up.
I remember reading this a short while ago; very good article. What's unique about the Gulf spill isn't the disaster itself, but the fact that it came home to roost. One of the functions of the global market economy is that richer nations are able to externalize certain costs, such as environmental damage. The fact that rich nations like the US are having to resort to making themselves vulnerable to some of these costs should be a pretty good sign that world oil reserves are getting stretched pretty thin. Ideally (from a market perspective, not an ethical perspective) all resource extraction would be far, far away from rich countries, so that they didn't have to bear any of the environmental brunt of it.
