Religion of Woke takes another Blow

[sharkman]

That sounds perfectly reasonable, but.  There is a sizeable minority voting block in the US that truly believes the earth will be destroyed in like 8 or 9 years if DRASTIC action isn’t taken immediately.  Their wish list includes:

- fossil fuel burning engines banished, immediately.

- Harvesting of trees abolished

- Meat production is methane production, everybody become vegan.

- Population levels greatly reduced.

- Donald Trump death penalty.

 

Ok, I made that one up, ha ha.  I’m not sure what’s on the agenda for trees.  But for these types, to save planet earth, voting on environmentalism is just part of their cult.  By posting this, I’m probably on a list now.  Thanks a lot!

[Aristides]

So if you don't like breathing coal fumes and you don't like your children having to breath coal fumes, you are woke. Guess I'm woke.

[West]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

So if you don't like breathing coal fumes and you don't like your children having to breath coal fumes, you are woke. Guess I'm woke.

Do you know what else I don't like? Freezing to death. Or not being able to purchase food because of left wing virtue signaling

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, West said:

Do you know what else I don't like? Freezing to death. Or not being able to purchase food because of left wing virtue signaling

There are alternatives to burning coal for power in the US. This suit was brought by the coal industry. Go to fucking Beijing and then tell me wanting to get rid of coal is virtue signaling.

[Michael Hardner]

12 hours ago, Aristides said:

Go to fucking Beijing and then tell me wanting to get rid of coal is virtue signaling.

Or Nanticoke on Lake Erie. Visibility in that area has so noticeably improved, that I can see the usa from the shores of where I go, every single day, where I never could before.

[sharkman]

There is nothing wrong with wanting to stop coal burning.  New technology has it burning much cleaner, but I believe China doesn’t have cleaner air as a top priority. They have dozens of coal burning plants and should be where the eco extremists(not you) should be focusing.

 

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Or Nanticoke on Lake Erie. Visibility in that area has so noticeably improved, that I can see the usa from the shores of where I go, every single day, where I never could before.

The atmosphere has no boundaries. Coal is the worst thing you can burn to make power, not just for CO2 but for every toxic emission. Just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean it isn’t killing you. Even oil is better.

[Michael Hardner]

And yet there are all those clean coal billboards in virginia? I don't understand?

[West]

16 hours ago, Aristides said:

There are alternatives to burning coal for power in the US. This suit was brought by the coal industry. Go to fucking Beijing and then tell me wanting to get rid of coal is virtue signaling.

What's better? Destroying the water with nuclear? 

[ironstone]

Not a joke!

Conservatives and progressives really are wired differently and it's apparently possible to determine if someone is conservative or woke by looking at brain scans. This from a PBS documentary.

 

[Aristides]

On 7/3/2022 at 9:26 AM, West said:

What's better? Destroying the water with nuclear? 

How does nuclear destroy water?

[Michael Hardner]

39 minutes ago, Aristides said:

How does nuclear destroy water?

Don't ask questions of the anti-cult cult....

[West]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

How does nuclear destroy water?

Ask the fine folks of Fukushima

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, West said:

Ask the fine folks of Fukushima

Well if you have a tidal wave than floods the reactor, so you don't build them on coastlines in high earthquake zones. Coal powered plants dump pollution into the air, 24/7, 365.

Edited July 18, 2022 by Aristides

[Yzermandius19]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

Well if you have a tidal wave than floods the reactor, so you don't build them on coastlines in high earthquake zones. Coal powered plants dump pollution into the air, 24/7, 365.

burning wood is worse

take away coal and more wood gets burned

you just made the environment worse

congratulations

[West]

12 hours ago, Aristides said:

Well if you have a tidal wave than floods the reactor, so you don't build them on coastlines in high earthquake zones. Coal powered plants dump pollution into the air, 24/7, 365.

An adequate water supply is vital in the cooling system of these reactors. 

Not to mention, how are land locked areas going to have adequate service with nuclear? 

[Aristides]

10 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

burning wood is worse

take away coal and more wood gets burned

you just made the environment worse

congratulations

Burning wood to generate electricity? Who does that? Who is going to clear cut forests to burn wood to generate power?

 

[Aristides]

20 minutes ago, West said:

An adequate water supply is vital in the cooling system of these reactors. 

Not to mention, how are land locked areas going to have adequate service with nuclear? 

Yes it is but have you never heard of heat exchangers? 

[Nationalist]

On 7/1/2022 at 8:24 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

hurting people and the economy harms the environment

and the brand of environmentalism that is anti-human and anti-capitalist is going to wane significantly going forward

especially in the face of rising energy costs and food prices

if someone calling themselves an environmentalist truly wants to help the environment

then they'd be willing to accept that government control is not the solution to the problem

if not, they out themselves as frauds trying to push a radical left agenda using the environment to sell it

BINGO!

These "Greenies" demand that all fossil fuels be discontinued from use, in the western work only, BEFORE we have a reliable replacement.

As far as logic and reason is concerned...

This ideology of theirs is insane and destructive.

Edited July 18, 2022 by Nationalist

[Aristides]

We will need fossil fuels for sometime but coal is the worst for power generation and needs to go. There are lots of alternatives, even oil is much better than coal. CO2 emissions from coal are up to 40% higher than diesel or fuel oil and 90% more than natural gas for the same amount of heat produced.

[Nationalist]

On 7/2/2022 at 7:33 PM, Aristides said:

There are alternatives to burning coal for power in the US. This suit was brought by the coal industry. Go to fucking Beijing and then tell me wanting to get rid of coal is virtue signaling.

You go to fucking Beijing and take your destructive ideas with you. I'd love to see how long it takes them to toss you in a cage.

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We will need fossil fuels for sometime but coal is the worst for power generation and needs to go. There are lots of alternatives, even oil is much better than coal. CO2 emissions from coal are up to 40% higher than diesel or fuel oil and 90% more than natural gas for the same amount of heat produced.

Sure...OVER TIME! NOT IMMEDIATELY!

Get a bloody grip on yourself.

[Aristides]

9 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Sure...OVER TIME! NOT IMMEDIATELY!

Get a bloody grip on yourself.

Over what time?

[West]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

Yes it is but have you never heard of heat exchangers? 

Every major nuclear plant is built by a sizeable body of water. Why do you think that is? 

[Nationalist]

6 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Over what time?

The amount of time it takes for our scientific community to find a way to generate enough power to satisfy our needs.

Until then, all we're doing is pissing into the wind and getting urine all over us.

Edited July 18, 2022 by Nationalist