avi,
question...why do you need a weapon?
also how many people could be killed by firearms if there were no firearms? i suspect less than now.
farenheit 9/11 ... sorry neo cons .
any film that gets a 15 min standing ovation must be worth watching.
i wonder if bush will go see it?!
avi,
question...why do you need a weapon?
also how many people could be killed by firearms if there were no firearms? i suspect less than now.
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
princess,
lets forget about this. i should not have insulted you. but it woud be good if you could recognize the environemntal problems associated with SUVs and our lifestyle in general.
PS: i am unfortunately not that young anymore and am 180 cm tall or small.
life long and in prosper!
Dan,
it is a simple fact that the planet does not have enough resources for 6+ billion people to life like we do in the US and europe. therefore it would appear logical that we use up as little energy and resources as possible. this might give us enough time to keep the system running until new technologies become available.
i am by the way not overly concerned with global warming etc...but there is really no need to senselessly waste resources and destroy the environment for fun.
thichi,
we are talking about senselessly wasting oil and other resources! putting insulation on your houses and driving cars that use less instaed of more and more gas would not reduce your life standard and safe us some years.
i have not heard a lot of scientists who claim the good would outweigh the bad in global warming. the increased lifespan in warm periods in the past was due to the fact that people were more vulnarable to cold periods back then.
overall it is of course right that humankind will have to survive temp changes caused by batural effects in the long run. but there is no reason to make it occur sooner than necessary - especially as long as we don't have technologies to deal with a lot of the problems caused by it (growing deserts, increased storm activity, raising sea levels etc.).
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
drwtsn,
Yes, the US consumes more resources than any other nation, but we also produce more than any other nation.
first of all the US is using an unproportional amout of energy. you guys (i know thats a generalization thats is not fair to everyone!) have poor insulation on your houses, drive cars that are larger than required (the more the burn the better), have a underdeveloped public transportation system, poor requirements for the industry etc.
secondly...producing all the stuff is actually the main source of the problem. humanity should get out of the consumption madness! most of the trash produced is just a burden to the people who buy it.
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
mulan,
i am far from being an eco freak. but the ignorance of some people to the problems is just very aggrevating!
to your example. you have to realize that north america is consuming 30% of the oil! eastern europe burns less than a fifth of that!
the fact that all people around the planet want to increase their living standard will cause a gigantic problem. the only solution is to consume as little energy as possible...all of us. and then if we are lucky and nuclear fusion works (in perhaps 50 years) we can live all happily ever after!
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
crazy,
if you want to reduce demand nuke the US. you guys are using up nearly 30% of the stuff!
hydrogen is nice but you need an energy source to produce it!
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
princess,
You must be either an ex-elder who still can't handle women who speak
this is not about woman or man...this is about ignorance! (and save the JW bullshit...i never belonged to this silly religion).
i know you give a rats ass about what i say...and you obviously also give a rats ass about what all scientists on the planet say and what the consequences of your and all our energy wasting is! BRAVO to that i say!
by the way...the production of a car that weighs twice as much as necessary also wastes a lot of resources.
lastly...i have no problem with someone who acknowledges the detrimental effects of these cars (not only to the environment but also to other drivers in case of an accident) but who actually needs it and thus has no choice. you on the other hand give a shit about the destruction of the ecosystem just so you can sit in a big car.
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
jim,
i think we are actually on the same side. i do support the use of alternative energy sources...but i do not see how those could produce enough energy to supply the growing world consumption.
about my post ... yep i typed gallons instead of barrels!
The last time I checked, OPEC was still using the 55-gallon drum as a 'barrel' size. That means that - according to YOUR statement, that is about 4.015 billion gallons per day.
according to www.OPEC.org one barrel is 159 liters. so the numbers i posted are correct ...just that it should say barrels instead of gallons. sorry for that! (PS: why can't you guys switch to the metric system for crying out loud?! )
but even your numbers say that only a fraction of the current consumption could be produced by agricultural means.
any thoughts on mr. taylor?s claims?.
u.s. demands greater oil output, lower prices.
"finance ministers from the united states and other major industrialized countries, hoping to affect the outcome of a battle within the organization for the petroleum exporting countries, formally demanded yesterday that oil-exporting nations raise production and lower prices to a level 'that is consistent with lasting economic prosperity,'" the new york times reports.
big tex,
what is your estimate of how much hydrogen can you extract from peanuts?
but seriously...hydrogen can be produced from hydrocarbons...but where do you get them? the sources are insufficient to produce enough hydrogen!
the only way would be fusion...which produces enough electricity to get the hydrogen via electrolysis out from water. (or cover half of africa with solar cells!)
the islamic religious extremists are destroying their people.
just as the christian right in the u.s. is more interested in it's own needs and wants than that of the country itself.
so too the islamic extremists want what they want regardless of the consequences to their country or their people.. ironically, osama the ultimate islamic extremist decided to attack the u.s. at just the moment when a christian right extremist was in power.. if christ's man gets elected maybe christ will decide to strike another country in the middle east and if osama survives maybe allah will decide to attack the u.s. again.
thichi,
the technological progress happened despite the church NOT BECAUSE OF IT!!! you surely have to recognize that!
at the time of the crusades islam was more civilized than christianity. besides that....do you have a link to the story that says it was the crusades that prevented a unification of islam and an occupation of europe?
farenheit 9/11 ... sorry neo cons .
any film that gets a 15 min standing ovation must be worth watching.
i wonder if bush will go see it?!
avi,
Like switzerland, an armed society is a polite society.
what kind of argument is this? you mean the swiss are a civilized society because otherwise they would shoot each other?
europe (caused by a better social system) has on average a much lower crime rate than the US. therefore it is natural that less homicides are caused by weapons use.