Re: in the beginning I was wrong -- world

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

05/17/24 12:51:52am

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]

Subject: Re: in the beginning I was wrong

Author:
pjk

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 01/16/06 1:00:26pm
In reply to: pa 's message, "in the beginning was song" on 01/16/06 11:53:33am

> Because it�s a fuel used by the poorest people on
>earth, because it dates back eons we should negate
>it�s ability to be used when it can? I do not
>understand your logic here.

projection #1 - I said it could be used in small communities with excess biomass

>
>It seems pretty profound to me (as in far-reaching)
>that buildings account for 48 percent of U.S. energy
>consumption and generate far more greenhouse gas
>emissions than any other sector.
>
> I�m not sure which definition of profound you are
>using� Do you mean profound like in the dark
>unfathomed caves of ocean? Maybe you mean far-reaching
>and thoroughgoing�like the atomic bomb ?

projection #2 - I never mentioned the good intentions of the architects

>Maybe you mean profound in terms of timeline
>hierarchies: like fossil fuels are more profound
>because they�ve been around longer than caveman. Or
>the reverse,: the new is the most profound�.so then
>that would make solar energy particularly inane?

more projection -

>My opinion is that this is not a sound rubric in
>determining the efficacy of heating sources.

more projection - who said anything about rubrics?

I would
>use that word more for describing someone�s outlook on
>life�.not to describe an alternative energy
>source�particularly one that can be used as a
>grassroots combinatorial effort in reducing waste,
>heating costs and CO2 emissions (alternative here
>defined as something different than status quo)

who are you arguing with here - not me.

>Are you suggesting that the government invest in
>biomass� (it does(to the anger of solar proponents). I
>thought you felt biomass wasn�t a successful
>alternative. I confused.

more projection

I wanted to suggest that the government is stealing and wasting great sums of our money and resources that could be reinvested in thousands of ways far more far sighted. The corporate-military-industrial-pharma-media-complex must be thoroughly redesigned. The industrial age is coming to a screeching halt in our children's life time, get it?

>I don�t think anyone (me) was suggesting that.

I know you weren't. I'm sorry I didn't preface it. It's my fault.

>I have assumed in the past that cars are the real
>culprit of global warming, but in reality, it may be
>the minipower plants of buildings that most of the
>western world works in. Again, once built, buildings
>have a lifetime (and energy consumption pattern) that
>lasts 50 to 100 years. And this sector�s consumption
>of energy is mainly in the form of burning oil,
>natural gas and coal. When I go up to francis' school
>I am shocked that no one wears sweaters...the heat is
>over the top, approaching discomfort for us naked
>humans.

This is all very good.

>I thought you just said that biomass wasn�t
>particularly profound because the cavemen were using
>it�because it was part of �common knowledge�.
>Wouldn�t biomass be part of this renascence of old
>knowledge you are encouraging here?

more projection

just because i said it wasn't profound doesn't mean i think it's stupid or useless. of course it is part of living on earth.

take care

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
in the beginning you are not clear	pa	01/16/06 3:47:25pm
projections upon you? -- pa, 01/16/06 5:53:57pm