The older I get, the more green I am getting. I may need to hug a tree.

[rykertest]

I would consider myself fiscally conservative, and don't believe Global Warming has anything to do with man, but energy conservation and being "green" doesn't conflict with that. I am a hunter and have a great appreciation of nature.

You need to conserve that avatar. lol man thats not easy to look at.

I really support hunters right to hunt and use ALL or as much of their harvest as they can. I have a hard time with guys that kill for sport. I don't see the point in that. Deer, elk, etc can be almost entirely used and most guys waste so much it's sickening. I have an unpopular view on hunting in that I think using a bow is really more true hunting. Killing a deer or elk from a half mile away with a high powered scoped rifle isn't hunting, it's just lazy. lol You have to really hunt with a bow and have to get within what....50 yards at the most? Thats MUCH harder. I know guys that are obese that go "hunting". They walk 50 yards off the road they parked on, and get on a ridge top and shoot. lol Thats lame.

K to you.

 

[rykertest]

i never thought reps "don't care about the environment"
like you said, the hardcore outdoorsmen are typically nature conservative ande practice old time traditions and values such as not wasting kills, not trashing the woods, and throwing back small fish/passing on small deer.
their beef with liberal "conservationisits" is they (they-liberals) want to dictate what everyone can and cannot do in the woods...bascially a minority making the call for the majority because the minority thinkgs it's better informed and more enlightened.
for instance, in michigan their was a dove hunting ballot on the nov ticket.
hunters and conservationsits were in favor and the majority...but the libs made a big deal over this, akin to baby killing, and got the bill defeated.
lol i thought, how biologists and hunting conversationists got beaten by rhetoric
does this make sense?

I do agree with you that reps do care, but they seem to get overshadowed by the big oil machine to use 1 example. I am not anti oil, but I am getting tired of their approach. I was reading an article recently that talked about how if we used just 9% of the state of Nevada for solar energy, it could provide enough FREE energy to power the ENTIRE MAINLAND USA. It just boggles my mind that we have not done this yet. I'm not saying give up oil, but it's free super clean energy so why on earth not?

I do see a HUGE difference between caring for mother earth and taking it too far. Most people don't realize that hunting is essential to a healthy deer population for example. If they are not hunted, they can starve. Now whats more cruel, using a deer to feed a family or having one suffer and starve to death over a 2-3 week period? This world was given to us (in my view) from god to live on and to use. That power/ownership comes with a big responsibility we need to take more serious.

How someone can akin dove hunting to baby killing is mind boggling. I'd be curious to see how many of those people that are against hunting doves are pro abortion but I don't want to misdirect this thread.

 

[jh1]

in

 

[redguru]

If you really ask, the smallest environmental footprint of any power source is nuclear. We could cut our fossil fuels usage and pollution levels to a third just by converting every coal and oil fired power plant to a fission reactor. Thanks Hollywood for fucking up a good thing. Now France is actually the leader in that technology.

 

[Gambino]

If you really ask, the smallest environmental footprint of any power source is nuclear. We could cut our fossil fuels usage and pollution levels to a third just by converting every coal and oil fired power plant to a fission reactor. Thanks Hollywood for fucking up a good thing. Now France is actually the leader in that technology.

turkey point, florida
thriving croc population in the surrounding area

 

[Gambino]

I do agree with you that reps do care, but they seem to get overshadowed by the big oil machine to use 1 example. I am not anti oil, but I am getting tired of their approach. I was reading an article recently that talked about how if we used just 9% of the state of Nevada for solar energy, it could provide enough FREE energy to power the ENTIRE MAINLAND USA. It just boggles my mind that we have not done this yet. I'm not saying give up oil, but it's free super clean energy so why on earth not?

I do see a HUGE difference between caring for mother earth and taking it too far. Most people don't realize that hunting is essential to a healthy deer population for example. If they are not hunted, they can starve. Now whats more cruel, using a deer to feed a family or having one suffer and starve to death over a 2-3 week period? This world was given to us (in my view) from god to live on and to use. That power/ownership comes with a big responsibility we need to take more serious.

How someone can akin dove hunting to baby killing is mind boggling. I'd be curious to see how many of those people that are against hunting doves are pro abortion but I don't want to misdirect this thread.

solar power ain't gonna build plastics

 

[rykertest]

solar power ain't gonna build plastics

expand on that point if you can. I think I see your point but want to make sure I follow your thinking.

 

[rykertest]

If you really ask, the smallest environmental footprint of any power source is nuclear. We could cut our fossil fuels usage and pollution levels to a third just by converting every coal and oil fired power plant to a fission reactor. Thanks Hollywood for fucking up a good thing. Now France is actually the leader in that technology.

I understand kind of how nulclear power works, but I'll admit I'm not that well versed and all the pros and cons. My initial uninformed view is how dangerous it can be. You know 3 mile island and all that.

 

[Gambino]

expand on that point if you can. I think I see your point but want to make sure I follow your thinking.

alternatives cannot fully replace our need for petro

 

[rykertest]

alternatives cannot fully replace our need for petro

Right I agree and just to clarify, I'm not suggesting we eliminate fossil fuels, they have their place. I just think we need to make a shift. To use fabricated numbers, make fossil fuels a third of our power and solar or wind or whatever as the other 2/3'rds. I want to see a shift to the majority be free and clean fuels and fossils make up the minority.

The more I read, the more I also think this hydrogen crap is a joke.