(February 16, 2019 at 12:35 am)bennyboy Wrote:(February 15, 2019 at 1:34 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: Yeah, the rich countries get cleaner environment on the backs of the poor countries forced to pollute their environment. Except, how it is then that the percentage of people who die of pollution worldwide has been decreasing in the last 50 years, rather than increasing?You argue strangely. What are you trying to say? I can see that you are hostile-- I assume it's because you are trying to make a killer point; but I'm not exactly sure what that point is. Why are you talking about my vegetarianism and about my living in South Korea?
http://www.moralcaseforfossilfuels.com/data/
You are a vegetarian, right? I believe I saw you say that in another thread. Then you are probably aware of this:
https://www.cowspiracy.com/facts
But facts matter only as far as they support your agenda, right?
No. Statistics disagree on this one, but the most generous study to support your case here I've seen shows the US could fulfill around a third of its energy needs from the renewable sources. Besides, why exactly would you care about it? You are from South Korea, and not from the US, right?
Answer me this question, and I might take you seriously about this: why exactly do you think the Green New Deal would, if implemented, have different effects than the Great Leap Forward did?
Are you arguing in favor of fossil fuel usage? Against the greenhouse effect?
You don't recognize this? This person is a hardcore free market libertarian who pitches the idea that we can consume our way to a sustainable future. By consuming green commodities we will stimulate innovation that will solve all of our global warming problems. It's very popular. And it's probably worse than climate change denial, because it encourages rampant consumerism in the name of combating global warming.
We do not inherit the world from our parents. We borrow it from our children.
