Oil sands, green groups unlikely allies in push for carbon tax


L Gilbert
+1
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

They got you hook line and lead sinker huh Les?

Well, if you don't believe that then look up the environmental assessments. DUH

If you have information that shows that Teck and Celgar are ditching their effluent somewhere, please post it.
 
petros
+1 / -1
#32
I did, DUH. There is no such thing as clean smelting DUH. Toxic waste is still produced and stored for future generatuions and polar bears to deal with DUH.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#33
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I did, DUH. There is no such thing as clean smelting DUH. Toxic waste is still produced and stored for future generatuions and polar bears to deal with DUH.

If you have information that shows that Teck and Celgar are ditching their effluent somewhere, please post it.
 
petros
#34
I asked you where do the toxins go. They go into improved holding ponds. Quaint.

Don't give me your bull**** that sweeping **** under the rug is an environmental improvement. DUH
 
L Gilbert
+1
#35
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I asked you where do the toxins go. They go into improved holding ponds. Quaint.

Don't give me your bull**** that sweeping **** under the rug is an environmental improvement. DUH

And I gave you the links to Teck and Celgar so you could see for yourself.
If you have information that shows that Teck and Celgar are ditching their effluent somewhere, please post it.

And yes, holding it IS an improvement over letting it loose in the rivers and atmosphere. DUH
 
petros
#36
That's where I learned about improved holding ponds that won't leach into the Columbia for a few extra years. What if a ploar bear swims in those toxic ponds?
 
L Gilbert
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

That's where I learned about improved holding ponds that won't leach into the Columbia for a few extra years. What if a ploar bear swims in those toxic ponds?

You'd prefer them just to let it slip into the river?
Polar bears? Grow up.
 
Tonington
+1
#38
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Name ONE instance where throwing money around has fixed an issue.

Smallpox.
 
petros
#39
There is no more smallpox?
 
skookumchuck
#40
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Obviously you haven't gathered much information on the issue at all, just listened to the hype on one side of the issue.
Same for the ignorant jackasses that deny climate change. lol

So? Everyone and anyone can have a baseless opinion.


I do not deny climate change, in fact i embrace it for it's proof of Darwin's theory, and watch bemused as the Ants struggle to survive while still laying too many eggs and feeding other less productive Ants so that they can also breed. All this while the planet does it's thing as it has done for millennia, not giving a **** about the Ants.
Sheeple do not like reality one bit
 
L Gilbert
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

I do not deny climate change, in fact i embrace it for it's proof of Darwin's theory, and watch bemused as the Ants struggle to survive while still laying too many eggs and feeding other less productive Ants so that they can also breed. All this while the planet does it's thing as it has done for millennia, not giving a **** about the Ants.
Sheeple do not like reality one bit

Jeeez. Climate is climate. Evolution of species is evolution of species. They may affect each other but that's about it as far as the relationship goes.
 
petros
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

You'd prefer them just to let it slip into the river?
Polar bears? Grow up.

So you admit they haven't been eliminated?
 
Tonington
+1
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

There is no more smallpox?

It was eradicated with a global vaccination program, officially in the late 70's. A disease of cows is another that was eradicated, just last summer it was announced that rinderpest was the second disease to be eradicated by humans. The etiologic agents for these diseases only exists inside biohazard labs.
 
skookumchuck
#44
Why contradict yourself? "they may affect each other"? Climate and evolution are the end game.
 
petros
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

It was eradicated with a global vaccination program.....

It's not eradicated. It's controlled for the time being.
 
Tonington
+1
#46
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's not eradicated.

It's eradicated, the disease has been removed from the population.
 
petros
#47
No chance of ever returning? None? Zero? Nada? Zip zant doodly squat?
 
Tonington
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

No chance of ever returning? None? Zero? Nada? Zip zant doodly squat?

Not naturally. Infectious disease requires an interaction between host, pathogen, and environment. They are no longer associated with one another.

Anyways, you can quibble with the WHO, you seem to believe yourself to be an expert in everything, but smallpox is a problem that was fixed by throwing money at a problem.
 
petros
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Not naturally. Infectious disease requires an interaction between host, pathogen, and environment. They are no longer associated with one another.

And that is controlled and not eradicated.
 
B00Mer
-1
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Spoken from pure ignorance. There's loads of information around if you can pry yourself away from the denial hype.

I'm not in denial, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.. seriously. The earth goes through warming and cooling stages all the time.

Northern Alberta used to be a tropical rainforest a million years ago. That's why we have the Oil Sands.

It's a cycle, that maybe, just maybe we should be messing with..
 
Tonington
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

And that is controlled and not eradicated.

Like I said, quibble with the WHO then, I don't care really. There is no disease in any population of humans anywhere.
 
petros
#52
That you know of.
 
L Gilbert
+2
#53
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

So you admit they haven't been eliminated?

Yeah, but what does that have to do with the discussion? You said, "Name ONE instance where throwing money around has fixed an issue." I gave you two. Now you are simply nitpicking about details, but the FACT remains that the river, the atmosphere, etc. are far better off now than they were.

Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

Why contradict yourself?

I didn't. They are two different processes. I guess you haven't figured that out yet.
Quote:

"they may affect each other"? Climate and evolution are the end game.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Evolution and climate are not games.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

And that is controlled and not eradicated.

Either way, throwing money at it fixed the problem. Smallpox may still exist but it does not infect anyone. If you'd said, "Name ONE instance where throwing money around has eliminated an issue." instead of "Name ONE instance where throwing money around has fixed an issue." then the discussion would have taken a different route, but you didn't. You are nitpicking about minor details in some sort of manner to vindicate yourself after making stupid remarks.

Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

I'm not in denial, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.. seriously. The earth goes through warming and cooling stages all the time.

Yes, it does, but because of human influence this particular stage in the cycle has been extended.

Quote:

Northern Alberta used to be a tropical rainforest a million years ago. That's why we have the Oil Sands.

It's a cycle, that maybe, just maybe we should be messing with..

Maybe, but so far, the vast majority of human interference has caused more harm than good.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

That you know of.

If you have anything showing a smallpox outbreak anywhere on the planet, please show us. Otherwise you are simply "if-ing" and "maybe-ing" your way through this discussion. And that is pointless to any serious discussion.
 
Cliffy
+1
#54
The point, to me, that is being covered up by the climate debate is that all this man made pollution is killing people, causing a respiratory problem of epidemic proportions and who knows what other health issues that are costing industry in lost time and the health system billions. Arguing about whether or not climate change is affected by human activity is a smoke screen to cover up the real and immediate problems posed by industrial and domestic waste. Islands of garbage in our oceans are poisoning sea life and we are ingesting it. Millions of tons of crap in our air are choking all living things. Raising temperatures are cause more frequent and more deadly storms. But that is OK with some because it is inconsequenial to being able to be a mindless consumer of useless sh!t: bigger cars and trucks, bigger TV and a ton of electronic crap, bigger houses with bigger heating bills and more dams, nuke plants and coal fired, puke breathing plants, Oh yes, and that environmental wonder of wonders, the tar sands and fracking that allows natural gas to come out of your phucking water tap. But as long as some can afford to buy one more piece of garbage, everything is just honky dory. What a bunch of brain dead sheeple. Capitalism, Yay, yay, yay!
 
mentalfloss
+1
#55
Two pages full and the deniers continue to ignore that even the oil sands industry would support a carbon tax to maintain their stewardship.
 
no new posts