?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Green Energy Scam?

Poll #1244130 Green Energy Bubble

I read in a comment to someone's LJ entry, "...green energy is the next economic bubble. And it's setting up with the same exact kind of propaganda and expectation as the dot-com era and the housing boom."

I agree.
6(23.1%)
I disagree.
3(11.5%)
Not sure, but the idea seems like it might have merit.
12(46.2%)
Not sure, but the idea seems ideologically motivated and is therefore suspect.
4(15.4%)
I have no idea what this person is talking about.
1(3.8%)

The Earth Needs Saving.

Absolutely.
1(3.8%)
Not at all.
0(0.0%)
Environmentalists exagerate environmental threats for cynical purposes, but there's a kernal of truth to their alarmist rhetoric.
4(15.4%)
Environmentalists exagerate environmental threats for cynical purposes, and they should be ignored.
0(0.0%)
The Earth itself is in no danger, but we're sure making a mess of the biosphere.
8(30.8%)
The Earth itself is in no danger, but human extinction is a serious possibility.
10(38.5%)
The Earth itself is in no danger, but human civilization is sailing into stormy waters.
3(11.5%)
Don't know.
0(0.0%)

Comments

( 4 comments — Leave a comment )
stanleylieber
Aug. 19th, 2008 05:58 am (UTC)
The Earth itself is in danger, in spite of my vote, owing to advanced military technology. However, I don't see cynical propaganda and climate change as an either/or proposition. I think two things are true: 1.) Green energy is the next economic bubble and it's setting up with the same exact kind of propaganda and expectation as the dot-com era and the housing boom, and 2.) humans are capable of destroying the Earth.
kmo
Aug. 19th, 2008 03:30 pm (UTC)
Humans are capable of destroying the Earth.
Thank you for participating in the poll.

It seems that the answer on offer for the second question that best fits what you've detailed here would be, "Absolutely." Did that answer seem too simplistic for you to endorse it? I wonder why you selected an answer that begins with a statement you take to be false?

If you have any links handy about the sorts of weapons systems that threaten the existence (and not just the habitability) of planet Earth, I'd be interested in learning more about that topic.
stanleylieber
Aug. 19th, 2008 04:02 pm (UTC)
Re: Humans are capable of destroying the Earth.
"Absolutely" didn't fit because recognizing danger does not equate to an endorsement of a call to action. To me they are separate issues.

I could be completely misinformed here, but my understanding is that current stockpiles of nuclear and hydrogen weapons would be sufficient to incinerate Earth.

As for selecting a statement that in part contradicts my actual viewpoint, I chalk this up to a problem of language. None of the given answers fit my perspective well enough to stand without additional comment. I would rather contradict and attach an explanation than propagate the illusion of total agreement with a curt declaration of fact.

Edited at 2008-08-19 04:04 pm (UTC)
kmo
Aug. 19th, 2008 05:11 pm (UTC)
Re: Humans are capable of destroying the Earth.
I would rather contradict and attach an explanation than propagate the illusion of total agreement with a curt declaration of fact.

Makes sense. Thanks.

( 4 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2017
S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Ideacodes