Difference between revisions of "Talk:Alternative energy"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(description vs. advocacy) |
(ulterior motives of the left) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
We need to separate (1) an objective description from (2) the arguments used by advocates. Most advocacy of renewable energy comes from a place other than the prospect of exploiting limitless sources of energy. Rather, it's motivated by an implacable, but unreasoned, opposition to [[fossil fuels]]s. | We need to separate (1) an objective description from (2) the arguments used by advocates. Most advocacy of renewable energy comes from a place other than the prospect of exploiting limitless sources of energy. Rather, it's motivated by an implacable, but unreasoned, opposition to [[fossil fuels]]s. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Alternative energy has been promoted by the left with heavy government subsidies primarily to reduce CO2 emissions and thus (it is hoped), reverse [[global warming]]. It also promises to reduce American dependence on oil from the Middle East and other unstable areas. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Are those their real reasons? Often the left engages in [[liberal deception|deception]]. Nothing is more common than to promote A to get B, while saying that A is good because it will lead to X or Y. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Does the left really think alternative energy will reverse global warming and reduce foreign energy dependence, or is there an ulterior motive? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 13:57, 3 January 2010 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 18:57, January 3, 2010
We need to separate (1) an objective description from (2) the arguments used by advocates. Most advocacy of renewable energy comes from a place other than the prospect of exploiting limitless sources of energy. Rather, it's motivated by an implacable, but unreasoned, opposition to fossil fuelss.
- Alternative energy has been promoted by the left with heavy government subsidies primarily to reduce CO2 emissions and thus (it is hoped), reverse global warming. It also promises to reduce American dependence on oil from the Middle East and other unstable areas.
Are those their real reasons? Often the left engages in deception. Nothing is more common than to promote A to get B, while saying that A is good because it will lead to X or Y.
Does the left really think alternative energy will reverse global warming and reduce foreign energy dependence, or is there an ulterior motive? --Ed Poor Talk 13:57, 3 January 2010 (EST)