- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 8/23/15 at 2:35 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
But even a dumdum has to realize they burning millions of tons of fossile fuels for hundreds of years has to have some kind of impact on the environment, right?
When I fart it has "some kind" of impact. What's being disputed is that man should live a radically reduced material life in order to save our planet from imminent disaster. That's what the global warming alarmists, led by Al Gore, are pedaling. Al Gore said that if we don't act in accordance with the Kyota Protocols within three years it will be too late. That was about ten years ago.
Of course we should be concerned about the effects of sustained human activity. But before we enrich Al and his buddies, and impoverish ourselves, we should be scientifically convinced it's necessary. As yet, we aren't.
Posted on 8/23/15 at 2:39 pm to baytiger
quote:
are we supposed to be surprised it snowed in Canada? Calgary has snow reports in every month if you go back far enough.
You do know where Calgary is located in Canada, right?
And should we be surprised that Phoenix has triple digit temps in July?
Posted on 8/23/15 at 2:42 pm to SpanishFortTiger
quote:
Regardless of your opinions on climate change and global warming, it is important to understand global warming doesn't mean the constant increase in temperature.
Pipe down, hippy.
Posted on 8/23/15 at 3:16 pm to baytiger
quote:
They know they'll be irrelevant in the next 100 years or so. They're trying to get theirs while they can.
Their current stream of revenue may be exhausted in 100 years, which is why they are aggressively pursuing multiple streams of income. Strictly in regards of financial success some places of extreme opportunity may not be in the most conventual places. We have a substantial portfolio of investors from across the world that are buying properties and holdings in countries that have developed due to oil profits, a very small part of the anticipated returns are tied into the expected continued growth of the oil industry.
An example to showcase my point is in the hotel industry. One of the most expensive (on average per room per night) and highest grossing hotel in the Hilton Cooperation for years was in Abuja (the capital of Nigeria). On average the cost of a room was well over $1,000 per night. This is way Kempinski is building a state of the art hotel in Abuja. The options for those traveling in the region are extremely limited. The last time I was there our company spent over $10,000 for security and lodging, we stayed for three nights.
Tying this back into the original topic, having wealthy Arabian and oil rich countries who have the resources to dedicate to exploring transformation of water and exploration into alternative sources of energy can potentially allow them to be the frontrunners in energy resources for generations to come.
I am a very proud American and have nothing but pride for our country. However, after spending time in different part of the worlds, it is amazing to see the advancements in a multitude of industries that we cannot compete in (for a multitude of reasons many of which are political). The gap between the rich and poor in the other parts of the world I have mentioned is disheartening.
I had the opportunity to ask a government official in one of these countries why they invest so much of their surplus into researching alternative energy and water systems rather than using it to improve the conditions of the "have-nots" in their countries. The response I received caught be very off guard. This official compared the decision they made to the same decision making process any informed investor would make in buying a stock. The government believes they have a more realistic chance or receiving a return financially on their investments in as he called it "industries that are futuristic in nature." I asked what is their biggest threat to these "futuristic industries," his response was just as surprising, he said if America reduced their domestic spending on governmental subsidies that yield little to no return and reallocated to similar industries, the United States would be able to recruit the pioneers in these "futuristic fields." He related it to how we captured German and Russian scientists back in the "space race" and arms race during World War II.
This official was also very comfortable this threat was not become a reality. It was very chilling to hear him walk me through a very well researched and calculated theory (based off of the information he presented) that the majority of American wealth in the power supply industry (it also actually ties into the telecommunication monopoly we have *see the merger of AT&T and Direct TV to see this is an actuality and not a theory) while not allow for the United States to have a realistic chance to compete in this market.
Please note that I am not agreeing with these theory or advocating we only focus on the those who have money and forget those who are not as financially fortunate. This official I spoke with had years of data the spending of the United States on domestic aid. The final statement he made to me in regards to this topic was that America in a financial sense was suffering from "internal bleeding."
I was not pleased about his comments but I i decided to look into my industry to see where the money was coming from. Our company allocates resources relatively evenly in North America, Europe, Asai, and the Middle East (relative to population) in efforts to acquire new business. We have properties in America in addition to our overseas properties. Only about 5-6% of our investors as of the end of our fiscal year in 2014 come from the United States.
You might be wondering what relevance this has to the original topic and may feel like I am losing focus on the original point. You have every right to that opinion and I will respect you in if that is your stance. I will argue that in all of my travels and having the good fortunes of working with people that have wealth I can only dream of, they invest their money in property, water resources, and alternative energy resources. Regardless of your stance on global warmer, climate change, or any other environmental issues. A remarkable amount of private funds being dumped into this industry.
This post was edited on 8/23/15 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 8/23/15 at 3:19 pm to LateArrivalforLSU
quote:
Pipe down, hippy.
In no way agreeing or disputing the theory. However, if you are going to argue that the theory is inaccurate, at least understand the entirety of the theory you are condemning.
Posted on 8/23/15 at 3:59 pm to biglego
quote:
But it's the fossil fuel burning that contains the CO2. Maybe we should cut back on some of that
Imagine we'll have technology that negates the affects of CO2 in the atmosphere long before we switch to alternatives.
Posted on 8/23/15 at 4:26 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
But it's the fossil fuel burning that contains the CO2. Maybe we should cut back on some of that
Except that co2 does not cause the earth to warm. CO2 follows temperature, not the other way around. After the earth heats up there is then a lag time before we also see an increase in CO2.
Here is one article on it. feel free to google volstok ice core sample.
Posted on 8/23/15 at 4:30 pm to beejon
It's unusually cold and snowed in Calgary.
Cancel GLOBAL warming!
Cancel GLOBAL warming!
Popular
Back to top

0




