Offshore drilling bill passes house - CONTACT YOUR SENATORS!

[scubafool]

I am optimistic that in the US since we have all sorts of money and brains that we can be the first to figure out a real alternative to our energy needs rather than resort to raping and pillaging our land!

See, there we are in agreement. We can find an alternative to oil. Someday. But note that we aren't raping and pillaging when we pump oil out of the ground. That is exaggeration on a large scale.

 

[MEL-DC Diver]

After re-reading many of these responses, I have to say that I am stunned that everyone really is not that far away from one another on the issues, even those of us that seem to disagree most vehamently with one another. The real disagreements seem to be HOW we arrive the endgame, not what that endgame is. H2Andy's summary a few pages back is pretty accurate and telling. Generally a well-rounded and evenhanded discussion, I think.

Pretty much the only disappointing item in this thread for me is the recent latent, or sometimes blatant, anti-Americanism. Being born into prosperity generally means that you come to expect prosperity. This has upsides and downsides, of course, but condescendingly suggesting that Americans haven't worked for their piece of the pie doesn't help matters. We tend to get our backs up when others tell us that we need to take one for the team, and tell us that over and over, no matter the issue - particularly when smacking us in the head at every available opportunity.

The above being said, looking at the responses here, while not a truly representative sample, should give us all a bit of a smile. It's a given that we are all not going to agree, but that we can have this discussion is a hell of a start.

 

[AXL72]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060630...olrGWOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

The house of representatives has passed a resolution allowing drilling off of the coastal shores of certain areas of the united states.

For those of you that have dove Florida, and California - you know how pristine and beautiful these areas ARE. If you have ever dove Galveston Bay, in Houston TX, you know how HARMFUL allowing this to occur can be!

Contact your senator and urge them to NOT SUPPORT this measure! Its time that we put forth efforts to look towards NEW and RENEWABLE energy resources, and stop raping this planet for minimal gains, as this would do.

I always thought that the water clarity and quality off Galveston was entirely due to the outflow of mud from the Mississippi and currents?

Are you saying that brown nasty organic non-hydrocarbon smelly sediment is from the oil rigs? WOW!

 

[drivsea]

I am currently on a Sat. diving boat that has been stuck at port in Calcasieau for more than a week due to a 70,000 barrell spill at a refinery upstream.
I have been on bottom wading through 2 feet of dead fish (some nice size groupers too) after dynamiting the top package off for the "rigs to reefs" program.
I have seen time and again "cleaning up" slicks by pouring dish detergent on it, or better yet leaving the scene quickly before daylight.
I have learned to be wary of trusting that those in charge know the best ways to do things.
There is a lot more to offshore drilling than just some lights beyond the horizon.

 

[bruehlt]

Scientific consensus is a myth:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597

The WSJ relied on a flawed study:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/26/wsj-gore/

 

[MEL-DC Diver]

I always thought that the water clarity and quality off Galveston was entirely due to the outflow of mud from the Mississippi and currents?

Are you saying that brown nasty organic non-hydrocarbon smelly sediment is from the oil rigs? WOW!

Axl,
You're late to the game. That argument was shot down about 20 pages ago.

 

[MEL-DC Diver]

The WSJ relied on a flawed study:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/26/wsj-gore/

Are you seriously suggesting that think progess is an unbiased source?

 

[H2Andy]

well, the problem is that you can always find SOMEONE who says there isn't a consensus...

consensus doesn't mean 100% agreement... but in this case, you're talking close to
90% agreement by the world's scientists... that sounds like consensus to me

but ... never fear ... there's always going to be someone to point to a few dissenters and say, "hey, there's no concensus"


In its most recent assessment, the IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities . . . are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents . . . that absorb or scatter radiant energy. . . . [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations."


The IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. A National Academy of Sciences report begins unequivocally: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26065-2004Dec25.html

now, you may disagree with that consensus (that is your right, and sometimes the
minority is right), BUT please don't say there isn't consensus. there is.

 

[bruehlt]

Are you seriously suggesting that think progess is an unbiased source?

Yes.

Besides, their information comes from credible sources (follow the links, Neo).

 

[Cacia]

It's a given that we are all not going to agree, but that we can have this discussion is a hell of a start.

I agree with you....

I even noticed progress in the whaling thread.