.....when the NeoCons & moralists do what they CAN, to keep their OWN kids from serving!!!! :eek:

I guess this is another example of Bush-style compassion. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17522-2005Feb11.html) :rolleyes:

"The number of gay and lesbian service members discharged under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy has dropped by almost half since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and is at its lowest level since the Defense Department began keeping such figures in 1997.

Significant declines have occurred in every branch of the armed forces, according to statistics released yesterday by the Pentagon. The Marine Corps, Air Force and Navy discharged fewer gay men and lesbians in 2004 than in any year since the Pentagon began tallying the number of its "homosexual separations" eight years ago. The Army's discharges represented the lowest number of discharges in five years."

.......or, maybe this is the moralists efforts at a Final Solution.

this just shows you how the repugs and media make people think the war is just and worthy but they are all too chicken shit to go and get shot at. so, where is all those assholes who voted bush back into office when they need more bullet stoppers in the front lines? the war will end either by no troops to serve, since it is a volunteer army. or the people finally get fed up and say , no more. or the draft will come back. and we'll see how long that will last. pffft.....maybe they'll privatize the military. an all mercenary service.

It's sad that once again, the dems, greens and progressives have to step forward to protect the country while the conservatives stay home and soak their anal cysts.

Dop

rich people start the wars and the poor have to fight them.

The military has a certain percentage of people that join as a means to an education, training, etc., and don't think in terms of fighting. During wartime, the numbers of recruits will naturally fall. The surprise is that you're surprised.



I don't get this part: "It's sad that once again, the dems, greens and progressives have to step forward to protect the country...."

What is it that you don't get?

How are those parties doing such?

Conservatives rarely serve in the military so, by default, that leaves the parties I mentioned.

If you look around this board, for instance, the only conservative I can think of that served is esfan. Agreeably, there are probably other conservatives that served, but that number would be small, very small.

Same for all your leaders and all your hate-radio mouthpieces.

Bush went AWOL

Cheney had 5 deferments ... with the reason being "I have better things to do" -- ROTF at that one.

Rush Limbaugh had a deferment for an anal cyst -- I'm not kidding.

Sean Hannity -- well he's simply a chickenshit with a big mouth.

and so on and so forth.

Does that explain it?

Dop

On edit: Trav also served -- thanks trav.

First off....id like to see proof of your claim that "conservatives rarely serve in the military".....

Secondly.... wouldn't you expect recruitment numbers to go down while we are in a war REGUARDLESS of what war it is or who we are fighting? I know i would......

DOP... your arguement is flawed all the way to the core....in my opinion. I think you dont have to serve in the military to be in a high ranking position....obviously you do. So hey ill agree to disagree on that one.

And as for your HILARIOUS statement about how "greens, progressives, and liberals have to *step forward (LMAO) and protect the country"...... so tell me what it is you plan to do to "protect" us lol....i'm DYING to know.

and finally Mr. Shaman...... I bet he was all for having gays in the military, and now that less and less are being discharged, he'll play both sides and rip into Bush for that too...... what an idiot.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing

Does that explain it?


Actually, not at all. How do you explain the way the military votes? Pretty amazing how those greens, dems and progressives pulled the lever for President Bush.

Oh, I know, I know. One of you will say "Well, if you want to believe what the government controlled media told you about the way the military votes, go ahead"

And then I'll say, "Then why didn't Al Gore want to count the military votes in Florida?"

And you'll say, "Well, if you want to believe what the government controlled media told you about Al Gore not wanting to count the military votes in Florida, go ahead?"

And then I'll stop responding and you'll say, "No response, eh?"

t's sad that once again, the dems, greens and progressives have to step forward to protect the country while the conservatives stay home and soak their anal cysts.

Gee that funny...It sure looks to me like the democrats are in on the scam if you ask me. But appearently only to a point. After they intentionally threw the election some of them are a little mad.

Originally posted by Decka
First off....id like to see proof of your claim that "conservatives rarely serve in the military".....
First.....you've gotta differentiate between Conservatives (like John McCain) & "conservatives" (fascists, in Conservative-clothing; i.e. The CHICKENHAWKS (http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html))!


http://www.awolbush.com/images/werent-soldiers.jpg

Originally posted by Brooks
Actually, not at all. How do you explain the way the military votes? Pretty amazing how those greens, dems and progressives pulled the lever for President Bush.


AFAIK, the military vote for '04 was not reported and if it was, please provide a link to it.

How do I know that conservatives don't serve???

Here's the official ChickenHawk database hosted by the New Hampshire Gazette -- read it and weap.

http://www.nhgazette.com/cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi?user_action=list&category=%20NEWS%3B%20Chickenhawks

ROTFLMAO

Dop

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
It's sad that once again, the dems, greens and progressives have to step forward to protect the country while the conservatives stay home and soak their anal cysts.

Dop


LMAO, your joking right? maybe your time in service differed from mine, but you could count the number of left wingers in my batallion on one hand. dont try and spread your lies again dop, you always get called on it.

I just posted a link to the chickenhawk database -- It pretty much tells the story trav. Conservatives simply find a way out of serving.

Dop

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Conservatives simply find a way out of serving.

Dop

It's easy to get out of serving - don't volunteer. Or is this a discussion about 35 year old issues?

It's not about serving just during a war or a crisis ...

It's about giving 4 years of your life for your country ... 4 years that could have been used to raise a family, start a business, go to college, work your way up the corporate ladder etc etc ...

In a nutshell -- it's about sacrifice. Something conservatives don't know about.

35 years ago? -- yes that's a big part of it.

Dop

get me a list of all the hardcore enivromentalists who drive cars

Originally posted by Brooks
It's easy to get out of serving - don't volunteer. Or is this a discussion about 35 year old issues?
"conservatives" thought it was a pretty, big issue, during the Presidential-campaign! :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Travh20
get me a list of all the hardcore enivromentalists who drive cars

Such a stupid point. Environmentalists don't believe in making ZERO impact on the environment, just less of one. What you should ask for is a list of environmentalists who drive fuel efficient cars. If we (yes, I'm an environmentalist taking offense, once again, to your ignorant points) believed in making ZERO impact, then we couldn't go on living without being a hypocrit since every breath we take throws CO2 into the air, ever step we take in a field tramples grass, .... Of course, if all environmentalists committed suicide, that wouldn't be getting society anywhere positive from the environmentalist perspective, now would it?

I think there's a huge gap between rich conservatives with pull (no trenches for them) and Joe Average conservative who really believes in his view point.

Joe average whether left or right always pays the price... some just think believe that they are doing the right thing.

such as more incentives to go green in energy production. the conservatives don't want that. they think it will ruin the economy. but other countries are proving them wrong. there is money in environmentalism.
what's wrong with cars that can run on hydrogen? more of them? it takes money from bush's oil buddies. but he is wanting a car made that uses tech that makes hydrogen from OIL! why? water is plentiful. it doesn't even have to be clean water. maybe even piss in the fuel tank. but that would be free fuel.



Originally posted by Leper
Such a stupid point. Environmentalists don't believe in making ZERO impact on the environment, just less of one. What you should ask for is a list of environmentalists who drive fuel efficient cars. If we (yes, I'm an environmentalist taking offense, once again, to your ignorant points) believed in making ZERO impact, then we couldn't go on living without being a hypocrit since every breath we take throws CO2 into the air, ever step we take in a field tramples grass, .... Of course, if all environmentalists committed suicide, that wouldn't be getting society anywhere positive from the environmentalist perspective, now would it?

Originally posted by Leper
Such a stupid point. Environmentalists don't believe in making ZERO impact on the environment, just less of one. What you should ask for is a list of environmentalists who drive fuel efficient cars. If we (yes, I'm an environmentalist taking offense, once again, to your ignorant points) believed in making ZERO impact, then we couldn't go on living without being a hypocrit since every breath we take throws CO2 into the air, ever step we take in a field tramples grass, .... Of course, if all environmentalists committed suicide, that wouldn't be getting society anywhere positive from the environmentalist perspective, now would it?

It is not a stupid point. Dop is out there saying his list proves NO conservatives serve. I know for a fact that that is a lie, as I am a conservative who served with a lot of other conservatives. s oif his slist proves that conservatives always get out of serving then a list of environmentalists who drive cars is not a stupid request. Obviously if you are concerned global warming is going to be the end of us all and you still drive, you wither dont care or you dont really believe global warming will be the end of us.

How many republican members of the senate/house have served or have children now serving?

Dop

Originally posted by ivan
such as more incentives to go green in energy production. the conservatives don't want that. they think it will ruin the economy. but other countries are proving them wrong. there is money in environmentalism.
what's wrong with cars that can run on hydrogen? more of them? it takes money from bush's oil buddies. but he is wanting a car made that uses tech that makes hydrogen from OIL! why? water is plentiful. it doesn't even have to be clean water. maybe even piss in the fuel tank. but that would be free fuel.
Do you see how I'm responding? I put the quoted material at the top of my post in an effort to allow anyone who reads my response to understand what I'm referring to BEFORE they have to learn to read something backwards. Just remember: top to bottom, left to right. It does make it easier...

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
How many republican members of the senate/house have served or have children now serving?

Dop
And you seriously think this is unique to republicans? Wow...

All I can say for certain is that I grew up in a VERY conservative family, and with the exception of my brother and I, everyone served, and without doubt, their military careers would've put yours to shame.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
How many republican members of the senate/house have served or have children now serving?

Dop i bet your one to talk...

Do you see how I'm responding? I put the quoted material at the top of my post in an effort to allow anyone who reads my response to understand what I'm referring to BEFORE they have to learn to read something backwards. Just remember: top to bottom, left to right. It does make it easier... LMAO!


How many republican members of the senate/house have served or have children now serving? Just go out on a limb here and tell me how many DEMOCRAT members of the state/house have served or have children now serving?

There IS a huge gap between the "richie conservatives" and "Joe Average conservatives". But I think the same can be said for the Democrats also. But please, by all means, tell me if I'm wrong...


Gee that funny...It sure looks to me like the democrats are in on the scam if you ask me. But appearently only to a point. After they intentionally threw the election some of them are a little mad.originally posted by 500lbGuerilla Guerilla, WTF side are you on??

i bet your one to talk...
Actually, he did serve as a deck hand on board the USS Shagatsea during the Vietnam conflict, Utopia. I think he was the ship's comedian on the Lido deck. He fired one-liners at the enemy, who, for the most part, he sided with, but managed to perform his duties despite the fact that he felt bad about not being one of those "real men" who fought on the front line. He's now content with labeling others as chickenhawks, and feels good about his position. He was most noted for being one of the best receivers the Naval fleet....::ahem::, football team, ever saw. Go figure...

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Actually, he did serve as a deck hand on board the USS Shagatsea during the Vietnam conflict, Utopia. I think he was the ship's comedian on the Lido deck. He fired one-liners at the enemy, who, for the most part, he sided with, but managed to perform his duties despite the fact that he felt bad about not being one of those "real men" who fought on the front line. He's now content with labeling others as chickenhawks, and feels good about his position. He was most noted for being one of the best recievers the Naval fleet....::ahem::, football team, ever saw. Go figure... lol youre great. in fact youre one of the reasons i joined this site, praetorian, after lurking for a while. you have made some great posts. :)

Originally posted by utopia
lol youre great. in fact youre one of the reasons i joined this site, praetorian, after lurking for a while. you have made some great posts. :)
Why thank you, Utopia, I try. :D Btw, welcome to Allforums. :)

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Why thank you, Utopia, I try. :D Btw, welcome to Allforums. :) thanks man. it looks like a good community here. i like the debate, and this site looks like a good one. not too tilted one way or the other. except for the moderators and administrators.

So you're claiming shipboard sailors aren't real military praetorian?

Tell that to the thousands that died over the years in conflict.

You are a complete asshole for making that remark.

Utopia ... from the tone of your posts ... you must be the second coming of Chesty Puller ... what's your military story or are you just another praetorian IP address?

ROTF

Dop

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
So you're claiming shipboard sailors aren't real military praetorian?

Tell that to the thousands that died over the years in conflict.

You are a complete asshole for making that remark.

Utopia ... from the tone of your posts ... you must be the second coming of Chesty Puller ... what's your military story or are you just another praetorian IP address?

ROTF

Dop ill tell you im not praetorian. my military story is...i tried to enlist in the army back when i graduated high school, but they wouldnt take me because of my poor health ie bad knee. i walk with a pronounced limp because of it so they sent me on my way. too bad to because i really wanted to serve my country.

Here's a few thousand sailors you owe an apology praetorian.

Place of action KIA Wounded, Died, Invalided
died later POW from service
----------------------------------------------------------------------
North African landings
Navy 472 17 0 80
Marine 3 1 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sicilian landings
Navy 521 24 0 33
Marine 1 0 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Italian landings
Navy 788 31 1 74
Marine 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Landings in Southern France
Navy 36 8 0 20
Marine 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion of France
Navy 1068 32 2 263
Marine 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic or Caribbean area unspecified
Navy 2443 14 0 79
Marine 1 0 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Attack on Pearl Harbor
Navy 1744 17 2 41
Marine 99 2 0 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fall of the Philippines
Navy 337 2 630 3
Marine 89 0 413 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Netherlands, East Indies engagement
Navy 1656 12 94 7
Marine 36 0 7 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific raids
Navy 40 0 4 2
Marine 0 1 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Coral Sea
Navy 537 6 1 11
Marine 19 2 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Midway
Navy 301 8 1 15
Marine 39 1 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Guadalcanal, Tulagi landings
Navy 1176 20 2 85
Marine 988 77 12 365
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Savo Island
Navy 936 11 0 51
Marine 33 0 0 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Eastern Solomons
Navy 85 4 0 4
Marine 0 1 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Cape Esperance
Navy 168 1 0 5
Marine 7 0 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Santa Cruz Islands
Navy 242 5 0 16
Marine 12 3 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Guadalcanal
Navy 971 20 2 62
Marine 10 1 0 8
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Tassafaronga
Navy 389 8 0 8
Marine 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Capture of remaining Solomons
Navy 1246 56 0 174
Marine 781 68 26 277
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Tarawa
Navy 724 3 0 23
Marine 950 34 0 210
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Cape Gloucester
Navy 145 9 0 20
Marine 325 33 2 157
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion of Marshall Islands
Navy 187 3 1 44
Marine 401 34 0 141
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion of Marianas
Navy 513 43 1 228
Marine 3995 342 0 2138
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion of Palau Islands
Navy 185 10 0 68
Marine 1171 101 1 681
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Landings on Biak New Guinea
Navy 164 6 0 40
Marine 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardment of Truk
Navy 78 3 0 12
Marine 7 0 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to the Philippines
Navy 4026 270 40 830
Marine 132 10 1 25
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle of Iwo Jima
Navy 934 48 0 349
Marine 4907 614 0 3114
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardments of Formosa French Indochina
Navy 269 9 2 30
Marine 3 0 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombing and landing on Okinawa
Navy 3809 219 0 876
Marine 2897 347 0 2028
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardment of Kyushu Island and Japan
Navy 963 6 1 38
Marine 61 0 0 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aleutian or Alaskan area, unspecified
Navy 177 1 0 8
Marine 2 0 0 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific or Asiatic area, unspecified
Navy 4462 12 93 188
Marine 20 0 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After 1 July 1945
Navy 1103 14 2 88
Marine 41 0 4 172
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific action not determined
Navy 1719 20 30 773
Marine 346 10 43 721
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, all actions
Navy 34607 972 909 4647
Marine 17376 1682 510 10063
Total 51983 2654 1419 14710

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
So you're claiming shipboard sailors aren't real military praetorian?

Tell that to the thousands that died over the years in conflict.

You are a complete asshole for making that remark.

Utopia ... from the tone of your posts ... you must be the second coming of Chesty Puller ... what's your military story or are you just another praetorian IP address?

ROTF

Dop
Dop relax, I was just screwing with you. I knew I'd get a rise out of ya, and I DO have respect for anyone who serves, regardless of the branch. Cool down, my longhaired friend, it was a joke...

I tease you because it's difficult for me to figure out why you hate our nation so much. Maybe it's not hate, but whatever it is, it's definitely a strong dislike.

Yeah, sure you're not praetorian Utopia -- IP address are easy to pick off -- hard to hide.

Dop

Originally posted by ivan
such as more incentives to go green in energy production. the conservatives don't want that. they think it will ruin the economy. but other countries are proving them wrong. there is money in environmentalism.

Which countries are proving that?

Originally posted by ivan
what's wrong with cars that can run on hydrogen? more of them? it takes money from bush's oil buddies. but he is wanting a car made that uses tech that makes hydrogen from OIL! why? water is plentiful. it doesn't even have to be clean water. maybe even piss in the fuel tank. but that would be free fuel.

There are presently two ways to make hydrogen - from oil (easier) and from water (harder). Making hydrogen from oil doesn't do much to solve our future energy problems. Making hydrogen from water takes more energy to make than you get out of it, resulting in a net loss. Not to mention that widespread hydrogen production using this method would need a massive increase in electricity production and infrastructure. Shall we use nuclear power or coal? Is that an improvement for the environment?

And by the way, the car could care less what source the hydrogen came from. Hydrogen is hydrogen.

Originally posted by utopia
except for the moderators and administrators.
Erm? Are you saying I'm biased? Or just that most admins and mods lean left?

I'm a libertarian anyway...
Originally posted by LionelHutz
Which countries are proving that?
The only one I can think of is Iceland, and they have tons of natural geothermal power laying around.

In any case, hydrogen is not the solution. Biodiesel is...

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Yeah, sure you're not praetorian Utopia -- IP address are easy to pick off -- hard to hide.

Dop
Dop, come on man...

Borg - let him know.

Yeah, Dop, Prae and utopia's IPs are different. Not only different, but dissimilar...

see lungdop.

and borg. i dont know if your biased but your definately liberal. you dont seem much like a libertarian. but i havent been around long enough to see if you let your poltics effect your managing this forum.

Borg isn't liberal, however, he does have leanings. He also has republican leanings, and he's by far the coolest moderator I've ever encountered. Despite his age, he's fucking SMART. All things considered, he's a really good guy. :)

Originally posted by Travh20
so if his list proves that conservatives always get out of serving then a list of environmentalists who drive cars is not a stupid request.
Sure it is. You're dancin'-around the issue, that the military can't kick-out gays, because all the pro-war folks have headed-for-the-hills........or, to one o' their vacation-homes in Costa Rica! :p

Nice shot at trying-to change-the-subject, though. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Borg isn't liberal, however, he does have leanings. He also has republican leanings, and he's by far the coolest moderator I've ever encountered. Despite his age, he's fucking SMART. All things considered, he's a really good guy. :)
Ah jeez Prae, you're making me blush...for what it's worth, you'remy favorite conservative poster.

But thanks. I'm glad to know I'm so well liked here. :D

Not a problem, glad to say it... :)

Shees ... first I have to put up with trav and now it's Praetorian and Utopia telling their daddy that mean old dop is picking on them ...

Wa wa wa ... daddy Borg ... please come help us ... dop is questioning our IP addresses ...wa wa wa ... I want my mommy.

ROTF

Dop

Oh do shut up, Dop. The only person who was reading the thread who could confirm or disprove your suspicion was Borg, and he did. What else did you want us to do: live with another one of your theories, or shut you up in record time? I think it's fairly obvious why I chose the latter, thank you very much.

Nice move praetorian. You buttered-up Borg like a fresh ear of corn.

You're the bestest moderator on the entire internet ... you're intelligent ... you're a nice guy ....

Why didn't ya bake him some cookies too and pay for limo service to and from school and paid up hunting and fishing licenses and throw in world series tickets ... make that wrestlemania tickets. That would have sealed the deal.

Post-it note to Borg ... I agree with everything Praetorian said but don't tell him.

Dop

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
and throw in world series tickets ... make that wrestlemania tickets. That would have sealed the deal.
I hate wrestling, but love baseball. The former would have worked better. :)

Originally posted by utopia
not too tilted one way or the other. except for the moderators and administrators.

Welcome to Allforums utopia...I think you'll find the mods and admins are fair. :)

Sorry Utopia -- I forgot to welcome you to the forums ... looking forward to debating and chatting with you.

Dop

just one small example, germany has been taking garbage and making building materials out of it. jobs and money.
hmmmm.........i'm not sure what you are basing your equations on but oil is not free. you are gonna get charged for it to just get it to a refinery for processing. water is free. oil is the driving force of violence in the middle east. water is everywhere except maybe in the sahara desert.
biodiesel is most likely a better solution. i guess the guy who has been running a vehicle on used cooking oil for years is biodeisel. he's proven that it works.
i believe that the reason so many alternative fuels are so expensive is because they do not get the subsidies (corporate welfare) that coal, timber, and oil companies get.



Originally posted by LionelHutz
Which countries are proving that?



There are presently two ways to make hydrogen - from oil (easier) and from water (harder). Making hydrogen from oil doesn't do much to solve our future energy problems. Making hydrogen from water takes more energy to make than you get out of it, resulting in a net loss. Not to mention that widespread hydrogen production using this method would need a massive increase in electricity production and infrastructure. Shall we use nuclear power or coal? Is that an improvement for the environment?

And by the way, the car could care less what source the hydrogen came from. Hydrogen is hydrogen.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Nice move praetorian. You buttered-up Borg like a fresh ear of corn.

You're the bestest moderator on the entire internet ... you're intelligent ... you're a nice guy ....

Why didn't ya bake him some cookies too and pay for limo service to and from school and paid up hunting and fishing licenses and throw in world series tickets ... make that wrestlemania tickets. That would have sealed the deal.

Post-it note to Borg ... I agree with everything Praetorian said but don't tell him.

Dop
Lol. That really wasn't my intention, but who am I to argue? I'm just the person who said it, not the one who KNOWS for certain, right Dop?

Peace dude, I don't want to "butter heads" today. :)

They could have used Fusion was it not for SHELL buying the rights, trademarks and patents for it all so they could burn the lot of them an continue pumping oil out.

Of course, it's in their best interest...and if you were the CEO, you'd do the exact same thing.

True :) Just a shame, though i shant pretend to know anymore about that subject, simply have a freind doing a Masters in Atomic engineering.

It's all Greek to me, too. :)

He went on to explain that if two cars driving away from each at 40 miles an hour would mean the combined speed was 80 miles an hour but if two atoms were going at the speed of light then it cant be twice the speed of light because thats impossible or something... it was at that point i suggested we stopped using physics to try and work out how to kill the enemys on Halo2

Originally posted by ivan
just one small example, germany has been taking garbage and making building materials out of it. jobs and money.

They've also got an unemployment rate over 10%

Originally posted by ivan
hmmmm.........i'm not sure what you are basing your equations on but oil is not free. you are gonna get charged for it to just get it to a refinery for processing. water is free. oil is the driving force of violence in the middle east. water is everywhere except maybe in the sahara desert.

I'm not making an economic argument, I'm making a power argument. It takes more than 1 watt of power to create enough hydrogen from water that would expel 1 watt of power when burned. That's a net loss. In other words, you're cleaning up car emissions and making power plant emissions much worse (which is the problem with electric cars that everyone ignores). Overall, the environment gets worse.

Originally posted by ivan
biodiesel is most likely a better solution. i guess the guy who has been running a vehicle on used cooking oil for years is biodeisel. he's proven that it works.

Diesels are more fuel efficient, which is a good thing. They also have way more hydrocarbon and particulate emissions than a gasoline powered car, which is bad.

Originally posted by ivan
i believe that the reason so many alternative fuels are so expensive is because they do not get the subsidies (corporate welfare) that coal, timber, and oil companies get.

Ethanol gets massive government subsidies as a favor to the farm states. About 30-40 cents of every dollar of gas is tax, so I don't see your point.

Originally posted by Lokideviluk
They could have used Fusion was it not for SHELL buying the rights, trademarks and patents for it all so they could burn the lot of them an continue pumping oil out.

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. But, if it's true, then the method needed to create fusion has been made public - that's the only way you can get a patent. And patents are only good for a limited amount of time (20 years in the U.S.) - so soon we will all be enjoying fusion. Or at least we would be if the story wasn't an urban legend.

Peace preatorian ...

I'm gonna just watch this thread and see if Lionel and Loki figure out how to travel at twice the speed of light ... pretty advanced stuff for me considering I'm still working on that Newton apple thing.

Dop

Me, too. :)

Originally posted by LionelHutz





Ethanol gets massive government subsidies as a favor to the farm states. About 30-40 cents of every dollar of gas is tax, so I don't see your point.


so, when do we see more ethanol fueled cars, and ethanol pumps? my car doesn't run on it because it isn't tweaked for it. and i haven't seen an ethanol pump in 10 years.
there are a hell of a lot of problems, and a lot of answers but i don't see the government doing anything really positive since carter to do anything about it. pumping oil out of the arctic isn't a positive solution either, like bush wants people to think.

It's like a tennis match on this thread. Dop's up, then he's down...then Prae totally kicks in with the deck hand/receiver lines and I can't keep from pissing my pants. :)

Don't know what this thread is about now.......

Originally posted by Echo2
Get real. In WW2 voluntary enlistment went up. Just about everyone wanted to serve because they knew it was in America's best interest.
Bullshit, Echo. Enlistment went up because people believed in their country, had a sense of patriotism, and loved being American, not just because they thought it was in our best interest to fight. We were attacked, remember? America sat on its ass for a long time before getting involved, and getting bombed was the catalyst. Kind of like 9/11, except the rules have changed. It's not a country attacking us, it's a group of individuals whose activities are endorsed by certain nations, so we're fighting it differently.

Originally posted by Echo2
Don't know what this thread is about now.......

It's turned into the 'take a cheap shot at Dop' thread which is the usual result of me getting too close to the truth for the conservatives to handle.

They (the usual suspects) always strike back with name calling and lately lots of sexual inuendo that I guess is supposed to either piss me off or embarass me ... not sure ... kinda wierd to hear mature people use that stuff in debate. Oh well ... no one ever accused conservatives of having any class.

Dop

Are you still sore about the USS Shagatsea thing??? Jesus, Dop, I already apologized...

Next thing you know, you'll be out there buying tampons, wearing makeup, and crying over every little thing that gets under your skin. Relax, baby...it's all in good fun.

And btw, class:...well I have oodles. ;)

Originally posted by Travh20
It is not a stupid point. Dop is out there saying his list proves NO conservatives serve. I know for a fact that that is a lie, as I am a conservative who served with a lot of other conservatives. s oif his slist proves that conservatives always get out of serving then a list of environmentalists who drive cars is not a stupid request. Obviously if you are concerned global warming is going to be the end of us all and you still drive, you wither dont care or you dont really believe global warming will be the end of us.

No one has ever asked people to stop producing CO2 (which, as I said before would require committing suicide), just to reduce production of CO2. This is because the cause of global warming is TOO MUCH greenhouse gas (the planet needs some greenhouse gases). There's a huge difference you're failing to grasp, which is particularly sad considering your environmental science background.

Another oblique allusion to a sexuality preference ... geesh ... are you homophobic or just trying to be funny? Will you get a quorum?

Starting to see why people drop off this forum.

Dop

Okay, Dop...sorry for the final time, and no, I'm not a homophobe. I painted that picture because you were acting like a woman by using Echo's confusion as a tool to bring up some shit you were obviously still miffed over. Relax, and let's not try to threadfuck this string anymore, okay? Thanks.

Prae - Find some new material. The "I'm not a homophobe you damn fu@king faggot" act is getting old.

You conservatives are reaching for excuses. Inlistment went up during WW2 because people believed that America was in danger. Enlistment went gone down in the Korean, Vietnam and middle east wars because people didn't believe that America was in danger.

All you gung ho neocons that think killing and wars are so wonderful should go sign up and send your kids to die. Quit complaining because no one else wants to fight your wars for you.

Originally posted by Echo2
Prae - Find some new material. The "I'm not a homophobe you damn fu@king faggot" act is getting old.
Wow, a damn near verbatim quote...:rolleyes:

You know, Echo, if fecal matter were music, your mouth would be a veritable brass band...

That was a good one Prae. I chuckled outloud. :D

Originally posted by Leper
No one has ever asked people to stop producing CO2 (which, as I said before would require committing suicide), just to reduce production of CO2. This is because the cause of global warming is TOO MUCH greenhouse gas (the planet needs some greenhouse gases). There's a huge difference you're failing to grasp, which is particularly sad considering your environmental science background.

leper, I understand the argument for global warming, and I never denied that the earth may be getting warmer. I do not believe that we are contributing a lethal dose of CO2 to push us over the cliff into oblivion though. GLobal warming has happened when ther ewere no humans arojnd and will continue to happen when we are long gone. It is all very complicated and requires so many variables that it gets downright mind boggling to consider the real causes of global warming. Galactic cosmic rays, solar flares, phytoplankton, rain forests, volcanos, earths woble and on and on and on. I know that theoretically cars and hairspray could potentially emit enough greenhouse gasses to do what we are told it is, but the time frame it would take would be huge. I understand the argument that we are adding to the natural process and all that, but I just cant get past the fact that global warming is more of a political agenda, almost a religion to some of the more extreme believers.

Originally posted by ivan
so, when do we see more ethanol fueled cars, and ethanol pumps? my car doesn't run on it because it isn't tweaked for it. and i haven't seen an ethanol pump in 10 years.

Usually it's blended with gasoline - about 10%.

Originally posted by Travh20
leper, I understand the argument for global warming, and I never denied that the earth may be getting warmer. I do not believe that we are contributing a lethal dose of CO2 to push us over the cliff into oblivion though. GLobal warming has happened when ther ewere no humans arojnd and will continue to happen when we are long gone. It is all very complicated and requires so many variables that it gets downright mind boggling to consider the real causes of global warming. Galactic cosmic rays, solar flares, phytoplankton, rain forests, volcanos, earths woble and on and on and on. I know that theoretically cars and hairspray could potentially emit enough greenhouse gasses to do what we are told it is, but the time frame it would take would be huge. I understand the argument that we are adding to the natural process and all that, but I just cant get past the fact that global warming is more of a political agenda, almost a religion to some of the more extreme believers.

Trav, what an intelligent post. I agree with you on all points, but what if we're both wrong? I don't know if the scientists are right or wrong about global warming, but what if they're right?

Wow, a damn near verbatim quote...

You know, Echo, if fecal matter were music, your mouth would be a veritable brass band... OMG! LMAO! Where do you get this shit at a moments notice?

No offense Echo - I just thought his comeback was hilarious.

I understand the argument that we are adding to the natural process and all that, but I just cant get past the fact that global warming is more of a political agenda, almost a religion to some of the more extreme believers. I too agree with you 100% here Trav.

Originally posted by saycricket
I too agree with you 100% here Trav.
You conservative-neandrathals never were big fans of the Evil that is Science (http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/global_warming/index.cfm). :@@:

Originally posted by Mr. Shaman
You conservative-neandrathals never were big fans of the Evil that is Science (http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/global_warming/index.cfm). :@@:
Well, that's simply because you liberal-asswipes never were big fans of the Evil that is Reality. :@@:

Trav's not saying that we don't contribute to polluting the atmosphere; he's saying that global warming trends have existed throughout history, and our contribution, while recognized as a factor, isn't decisively what's causing the current milieu. We don't have the data to accurately dispel the belief that humans are the sole cause of this situation, and in recognizing that, recognize this: assumption is the mother of all fuck ups, and stifling business is a good way to cut off a society's nose despite its face. Look at Greenpeace…It's far more politically orientated than it is environmentally, even though their main goal is to pander environmental issues to the unknowing public.

As proof of people’s general stupidity, grab a notepad, a pen, and a clipboard. Go to a local park come springtime, and tell random people you’re an environmental activist. Ask them if they know anything about the devastating effects of Dihydrogen monoxide. Tell them it’s everywhere, it’s in their food, and their homes, and if they don’t act now, they could be in serious trouble. Tell them you’ve prepared a petition and ask that they sign it. My guess is about 90-95% of the people will gladly do it while having no concept that they just signed a petition to ban water. My point is simple: everyone swallows this environmental shit hook, line, and sinker, and while it behooves us all to pay attention to facts and details, it makes no sense to jump to conclusions.

Originally posted by saycricket
OMG! LMAO! Where do you get this shit at a moments notice?
I come from a whole family of people like that, and after 28 years of honing my skills, I became pretty good at it. Btw, thanks for the compliment. :)