Comment 43184

By Kiely (registered) | Posted July 13, 2010 at 10:01:34

Kiely's blind faith in science. - WRCU2

Bit of an exaggeration on your part don't you think?

Having "faith" in existing, viable, but under supported and under used technology is hardly "blind faith" in science WRCU2.

A horse runs on water and grass and excretes natural fertilizer as a by-product. - WRCU2

Imagine all the cars in the world replaced by "fertilizer excreting" modes of transportation. Ya, good times that would be. The "good old days" only appear so in history books and movies. Pining for a world that doesn't exist anymore is useless.

Would it be better if all of us were Mennonites and luddites? Sure, maybe. But being realistic and not seeing that happening any time soon, I choose to support new technologies to help with our "Petro-apocalypse". Calling that "blind faith" in technology is incorrect (i.e., it is not "faith" to believe in proven technologies) and ignorant (i.e., makes me think people are unaware of what technologies are available and how some of them can change our world).

Are cars going to get more efficient? Yes. Though they clearly haven't been working hard (there was a decades-long stagnation thanks to SUVs) at it, they'll have to. The question is, will those efficiency gains be swallowed up by more driving, and more drivers, or whether it will complement a transition? - Undustrial

It wasn't just SUVs Undustrial and beware the "efficient" word… car companies love that word. 40 mpg cars existed in the 1970s. If people were happy with the performance levels of late 1970's cars we'd be much better off today but unfortunately a lot of the engine technology over the past 2-3 decades has been seen as horsepower gains not increased fuel economy. Cars have become overpowered rich men's dens on wheels. Now a mid size sedan can produce 250-300 HP while achieving 20 mpg, cars have become dramatically more "efficient", but that is not the same as better fuel economy. But this is the fault of the people buying, not the people selling.

But it seems to be in keeping with most suburban thinking to assure everyone that such a thing is just around the corner. That way, nobody has to adjust their lifestyle or thinking - Bob Innes

I clearly state lifestyle changes are needed too.

I will have to retract that statement if (if and only if)cold fusion or an equivalent something-from-nothing technology is successfully invented. String theory anyone? But until such a thing does happen, we must act on the assumption it will not happen, not that it will. - Bob Innes

I don't know if the "all or nothing" attitude of this comment was intended Bob, but there are things that can be done prior to cold fusion. And FYI, cold fusion may very well be a pipedream but it isn't dead yet.

I nonetheless appreciate the necessity of MacKillop's approach as being one means, perhaps the only means of getting folks serious about the needed change. - Bob Innes

Sensationalizing does not help. Go ask the climate change movement how the "doomsday" preaching has helped their cause? I don't disagree with Mr. MacKillop's facts, I just don't care for how he packages them. I see no benefit in his attitude.

Sometimes we stare so long at the door that is closing that we see too late the one that is open - Alexander Graham Bell

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds