The post you replied to seems to have been wrong- the real fear isn't about "dead birds" but "large quantities of deadly poisons in our bodies" since that's what happens through biological magnification if DDT continues to be introduces into the food chain. It's standard biology, but you probably dropped out of school before you took that class.
In regards to Ron Paul not being in the survey: Maybe they only included Candidates who stood a chance in hell of actually becoming president. Just a thought.
Where are the other candidates? The two party system sucks, and thanks for making it even suckier by not including Ron Paul, he is STILL running. Since John McCain is in violation of breaking campaign finance laws.
Some people might have believed this question to be environmentally related. Considering Senator Barack Obama is winning this poll by an overwhelming majority, I think most people took "greenest" to mean "the least experienced" or "unripe."
Nuclear power may provide a viable option for "green" power, but the reality is it will be far too slow to develop enough nuclear plants to replace our heavy reliance on coal power.
According to some studies, there is not enough oil and natural gas left in the world to push the world over the "point of no return" in regards to greenhouse gases. Only the overwhelming amount of coal remaining in the world can do that.
The most straightforward way to solve environmental and energy problems is to begin radically reducing the amount of energy that new and remodeled buildings use. This is not only feasible through proper design and technology, but it doesn't cost us mobility or huge re-investment in infrastructure like nuclear power would. As energy use is reduced from properly-designed buildings, we can begin to phase out coal plants and replace the (fewer) needed plants with solar, wind, and nuclear power.
Unless your not interested in powering anything bigger than a toaster, solar and wind aren't going to do much for ya. And last time I checked, Yucca Mountain -- in the middle of the Nevada desert -- isn't in anyone's water table. The nearest "backyard" is hundreds of miles away.
We were better off spraying poisons onto our skin and yards like DDT? I don't think so. I'd rather wake up to a mosquito bite than dead birds in my yard.
I'd guess that the millions who have contracted malaria in the Third World since the banning of DDT would love to discuss that trade-off. It's hard to gauge their opinion, though, since they're dead from mosquito bites.
By the way, DDT doesn't leave "dead birds" in your yard. It can weaken the shells of eggs birds lay. I'd link to some stuff for you, but you'd just dismiss it as "pseudo-science" co-written by Oral Roberts and Benny Hinn.
No you didn't just say nuclear power is better for the environment than, lets say, solar or wind? Ever wonder what happens to radioactive material once it is no longer useful as fuel? Its still radioactive! It can still cause cancer and radiation poisoning and a slew of other health hazards. Just because they're not useful as fuel anymore, does not mean they are any less harmful to humans or other wildlife. If you're not worried about it, I propose it should be shipped to your backyard...It can go in your drinking water.
And thats not even going into all the drilling and habitat destruction to mine these radioactive materials.
And that little report you just cited, is complete BS pseudo-science. Probably written by some intelligent design-er. We were better off spraying poisons onto our skin and yards like DDT? I don't think so. I'd rather wake up to a mosquito bite than dead birds in my yard. Read the book "Silent Spring." What ever happened to non-chemical methods of mosquito control, like mosquito screens and nets?
Elected officials probably won't do anything about the environment and global warming unless we as voters make it a priority. Write your congressmen and women! If its important to you, tell them you aren't going to vote for a candidate that isn't going to take action on these issues.
Thoughts
Refreshing
Submitted on April 4th, 2008 by AnonymousNice to know propaganda still works.
About DDT
Submitted on April 3rd, 2008 by AnonymousThe post you replied to seems to have been wrong- the real fear isn't about "dead birds" but "large quantities of deadly poisons in our bodies" since that's what happens through biological magnification if DDT continues to be introduces into the food chain. It's standard biology, but you probably dropped out of school before you took that class.
In regards to Ron Paul not
Submitted on April 1st, 2008 by AnonymousIn regards to Ron Paul not being in the survey: Maybe they only included Candidates who stood a chance in hell of actually becoming president. Just a thought.
Greener?
Submitted on March 31st, 2008 by AnonymousWhere are the other candidates? The two party system sucks, and thanks for making it even suckier by not including Ron Paul, he is STILL running. Since John McCain is in violation of breaking campaign finance laws.
"Greenest Candidate" LOL
Submitted on March 31st, 2008 by AnonymousSome people might have believed this question to be environmentally related. Considering Senator Barack Obama is winning this poll by an overwhelming majority, I think most people took "greenest" to mean "the least experienced" or "unripe."
Nuclear too slow
Submitted on February 23rd, 2008 by NateNuclear power may provide a viable option for "green" power, but the reality is it will be far too slow to develop enough nuclear plants to replace our heavy reliance on coal power.
According to some studies, there is not enough oil and natural gas left in the world to push the world over the "point of no return" in regards to greenhouse gases. Only the overwhelming amount of coal remaining in the world can do that.
The most straightforward way to solve environmental and energy problems is to begin radically reducing the amount of energy that new and remodeled buildings use. This is not only feasible through proper design and technology, but it doesn't cost us mobility or huge re-investment in infrastructure like nuclear power would. As energy use is reduced from properly-designed buildings, we can begin to phase out coal plants and replace the (fewer) needed plants with solar, wind, and nuclear power.
Check out www.architecture2030.org for more info about this strategy.
Oh yes he did!
Submitted on February 23rd, 2008 by Jim LakelyUnless your not interested in powering anything bigger than a toaster, solar and wind aren't going to do much for ya. And last time I checked, Yucca Mountain -- in the middle of the Nevada desert -- isn't in anyone's water table. The nearest "backyard" is hundreds of miles away.
I'd guess that the millions who have contracted malaria in the Third World since the banning of DDT would love to discuss that trade-off. It's hard to gauge their opinion, though, since they're dead from mosquito bites.
By the way, DDT doesn't leave "dead birds" in your yard. It can weaken the shells of eggs birds lay. I'd link to some stuff for you, but you'd just dismiss it as "pseudo-science" co-written by Oral Roberts and Benny Hinn.
Oh, no you didnt...
Submitted on February 23rd, 2008 by AnonymousNo you didn't just say nuclear power is better for the environment than, lets say, solar or wind? Ever wonder what happens to radioactive material once it is no longer useful as fuel? Its still radioactive! It can still cause cancer and radiation poisoning and a slew of other health hazards. Just because they're not useful as fuel anymore, does not mean they are any less harmful to humans or other wildlife. If you're not worried about it, I propose it should be shipped to your backyard...It can go in your drinking water.
And thats not even going into all the drilling and habitat destruction to mine these radioactive materials.
And that little report you just cited, is complete BS pseudo-science. Probably written by some intelligent design-er. We were better off spraying poisons onto our skin and yards like DDT? I don't think so. I'd rather wake up to a mosquito bite than dead birds in my yard. Read the book "Silent Spring." What ever happened to non-chemical methods of mosquito control, like mosquito screens and nets?
Elected officials probably won't do anything about the environment and global warming unless we as voters make it a priority. Write your congressmen and women! If its important to you, tell them you aren't going to vote for a candidate that isn't going to take action on these issues.
Why greenness?
Submitted on February 23rd, 2008 by Chuck_JohnsonWhy do we care? Whenever a candidate says we need "greenness," don't believe them for a second.
The real "green power" is nuclear power but I daresay none of the candidates has the stomach to go up against the green lobby.
he is the greenest
Submitted on February 22nd, 2008 by sunshine308Obama is the greenest as in greenhorn,
Of course, Barack is the greenest!
Submitted on February 22nd, 2008 by AnonymousHe admitted to smoking cannabis in his book! (And he's greener than Bill Clinton, who said he toked, but didn't inhale.)
In both senses of the
Submitted on February 22nd, 2008 by AnonymousIn both senses of the word...