Difference between revisions of "Is our freedom to consume what we want whenever we want worth the cost (i.e. environmental, social, economic, etc.)?"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(The Luddites opposed to energy production and consumption are not building hospitals to extend lifespan. The short lifespan in energy-deficient nations in Africa could be alleviated quickly with)
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
Correlation does not imply causation. This is, however, a very interesting theory and has given me something to think about. Perhaps more evidence is required? Maybe countries in the Middle East could be closely compared, considering the overall similarities between those countries and the fact that some have oil, while others don't. [[User:JimFullerton|JimFullerton]] 16:27, 16 May 2010 (EDT)
 
Correlation does not imply causation. This is, however, a very interesting theory and has given me something to think about. Perhaps more evidence is required? Maybe countries in the Middle East could be closely compared, considering the overall similarities between those countries and the fact that some have oil, while others don't. [[User:JimFullerton|JimFullerton]] 16:27, 16 May 2010 (EDT)
 +
 +
: [[Correlation]] does suggest possible causation, and where, as here, there are reasons to expect causation, then the close correlation is persuasive.  The [[Luddite]]s opposed to energy production and consumption are not building hospitals to extend lifespan.  The short lifespan in energy-deficient nations in Africa could be alleviated quickly with more energy.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:55, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

Revision as of 20:55, May 16, 2010

PLEASE THOROUGHLY EXPLAIN ALL ENTRIES AND IDEAS.

NO

YES

The benefits of energy production and consumption exceed the costs. There is a close correlation between average lifespan and energy use, for example. Are the extra years in life worth the cost? Yes.--Andy Schlafly 15:25, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

Could you please further explain your stance on this issue?

It's simple: the more energy a nation produces and consumes, the longer its average lifespan. Why? Because energy production creates wealth that can then improve health-related facilities like hospitals, and energy use provides comfort.--Andy Schlafly 15:39, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

Nations with such freedom have less poverty and starvation, so yes, it's certainly worth it. DMorris 16:21, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

POSSIBLY

Correlation does not imply causation. This is, however, a very interesting theory and has given me something to think about. Perhaps more evidence is required? Maybe countries in the Middle East could be closely compared, considering the overall similarities between those countries and the fact that some have oil, while others don't. JimFullerton 16:27, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

Correlation does suggest possible causation, and where, as here, there are reasons to expect causation, then the close correlation is persuasive. The Luddites opposed to energy production and consumption are not building hospitals to extend lifespan. The short lifespan in energy-deficient nations in Africa could be alleviated quickly with more energy.--Andy Schlafly 16:55, 16 May 2010 (EDT)