Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Green new deal NOT about climate? Chakrabarti indicates about economy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="carlv_52" data-source="post: 74115643" data-attributes="member: 420395"><p>Well, then I guess we think those 30 years will be worth our entire civilization. Got it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In industry we have things called "stretch goals". If anything they alert us to a need and start our efforts. Remember, we as a nation essentially invented nuclear power and an entire class of megaweapons in a couple of short years. We put a man on the moon. We have within our grasp real tools to address the situation. Unless we simply are too lazy now.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We can scale nuclear. That's our best short-term bet. </p><p></p><p>Oh yeah, and the longer we debate if we should put the brakes on to avoid a crash, the harder we'll have to hit those brakes. Maybe, just maybe we'll have to give up some of our energy-wasteful ways. </p><p></p><p>The decision is being made for us by physics and chemistry. The best we can do is to understand the science and make the best possible decision. Debating whether physics and chemistry are real with people who want to remain ignorant of the topics isn't going to make them any less real.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="carlv_52, post: 74115643, member: 420395"] Well, then I guess we think those 30 years will be worth our entire civilization. Got it. In industry we have things called "stretch goals". If anything they alert us to a need and start our efforts. Remember, we as a nation essentially invented nuclear power and an entire class of megaweapons in a couple of short years. We put a man on the moon. We have within our grasp real tools to address the situation. Unless we simply are too lazy now. We can scale nuclear. That's our best short-term bet. Oh yeah, and the longer we debate if we should put the brakes on to avoid a crash, the harder we'll have to hit those brakes. Maybe, just maybe we'll have to give up some of our energy-wasteful ways. The decision is being made for us by physics and chemistry. The best we can do is to understand the science and make the best possible decision. Debating whether physics and chemistry are real with people who want to remain ignorant of the topics isn't going to make them any less real. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Green new deal NOT about climate? Chakrabarti indicates about economy
Top
Bottom