[rkwhoooooo]

I really would be pretty sad if Alaska got torn apart by Exxon Mobile for profit.

:/

[mynameisjonathon]

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

I stopped using my car. Bicycles FTW

I'm saving up for a road bike. 50-60 MPG makes 4 dollars a gallon seem like petty cash.

I flip off every person I see driving an oversized SUV. THEY are the problem with this country.

I'm sure the only reason they decided they wanted one was because it used so much gas....there is no other effective reasnoning. Every time I see an American tank get blown up I cheer! Think of how much gas that just saved!!!

[careyman_462]

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

minivans aren't that bad. My dad's gets something like 25 mph.

I guess it depends on the van and the driver. Dodge 6 cyl minivans are rated at 18 mpg, and 4WD Tahoes are rated at 16 mpg. I'm sure the 4 banger vans from other companies are more efficient. A friend of the family swapped her minivan for an Expedition and only got 1-2 mpg worse.

I hate on people that drive pickups just to have them for the look. You know. Non hicks. Or non carpenters. Ect. You'll see a lot of rich kids around these parts that drive very shiny, very large pickups, that obviously have no other use for them then to have something big.

No doubt, I know what you mean. I'll probably end up with a pickup within the next year, possibly a 3/4 ton diesel. But then again, I grew up on a small farm and will put it to use when I'm home for the summer, etc.

[NorCalBaller88]

Originally Posted by mynameisjonathon

I'm sure the only reason they decided they wanted one was because it used so much gas....there is no other effective reasnoning. Every time I see an American tank get blown up I cheer! Think of how much gas that just saved!!!

You're a pretty funny guy.

Pretty funny man.

[mynameisjonathon]

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

You're a pretty funny guy.

Pretty funny man.

I wasn't trying to be funny. Thanks for the middle school style come-back though. You should probabaly just walk though because the distrubtion and builiding of bikes uses gas.

[NorCalBaller88]

Originally Posted by mynameisjonathon

I wasn't trying to be funny. Thanks for the middle school style come-back though. You should probabaly just walk though because the distrubtion and builiding of bikes uses gas.

That's not true.

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by mynameisjonathon

Every time I see an American tank get blown up I cheer! Think of how much gas that just saved!!!

really?

[JcKa]

There's an emoticon.

[NorCalBaller88]

I think it's obvious that he hates america. The quote is right there folks.

[careyman_462]

Originally Posted by mynameisjonathon

You should probabaly just walk though because the distrubtion and builiding of bikes uses gas.

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

That's not true.

Well, yeah, it is. But then again, tennis shoes and shorts contribute as well. Even if cars didn't burn fuel it takes a lot more to make and distribute them than bikes. You cannot get away from the fuel issue in this country unless you build your own house (using tools you built yourself), grow your own food that you found the seeds for in the wild, and kill wild animals with homemade weapons for food/clothing. It's a pretty dumb point/argument.

I don't care if you ride your bike or not. If it makes you feel better, then by all means do it. It's certainly going to save you a hell of a lot of money.

[mynameisjonathon]

No he just made a comment that struck home with me, and if he desired the effect of making me mad then he got it. Rather than display an argument of emotion and stupidity over the comment, I just simply moved to another post and moved in there.

I happen to drive an Avalanche because my sister totaled my 97 camery. Beside recently using it for transporting wood to build a bridge for my eagle project, I really have no need for it. I don't like being discriminated against because my parents have money. We do so much more to waste energy in other ways, that the fact that you centered your arguement against me, without even knowing it I guess, irritated me.

[scumquat1]

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

You and I are in disagreement here. I value keeping alaskan ecosystems pristine more than I value american lives. Sorry.

I value driving my Suburban far more than I value your life. If I ever happen to see you pedaling on one of my roads, I'll be sure to run your *** over.

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

More bluntly? **** em, it's not our place to go in and screw up one of the few surviving pristine ecosystems left on the planet, not to mention one of the richest and highest producing.

I think we should pave the whole place over and make it one big highway that I can drive on. Pristine ecosystems suck. I prefer tall buildings to tall trees.

[InspectorChao]

Originally Posted by timmyt

Why don't we eradicate the poppy fields?

Because most Afghanis sell poppy seeds as their main source of income, and nothing else grows there. Many that grow poppy seeds are not terrorists.

[SynTek]

Originally Posted by timmyt

I'm all for drilling natural resources in our own backyard. But it's also a personal choice. Nobody is forced to live in the suburbs and forced into a 20 minute commute to work twice a day.

I moved from the suburbs to right outside the city with ample bus routes. If i don't feel like messing with the bus, I carpool with friends or my girlfriend. I realize my lifestyle is not for everyone. But those that can sacrifice a little luxury for the war effort SHOULD.

Otherwise, we've already lost. And you'll blame the liberals riding the bus for it.

Actually, economic conditions force people to live in the suburbs. Ever price an apartment inside the beltway of a major city?

[SynTek]

Originally Posted by timmyt

Why don't we eradicate the poppy fields?

1) Because afghanistan is a big place with a lot of land suitable for growing poppys. 2) Poppys are the primary source of income for much of afghanistan 3) Burning down the source of income for small towns doesn't earn your friends.

[SynTek]

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

You and I are in disagreement here. I value keeping alaskan ecosystems pristine more than I value american lives. Sorry.

More bluntly? **** em, it's not our place to go in and screw up one of the few surviving pristine ecosystems left on the planet, not to mention one of the richest and highest producing.

The sooner the market forces us to alternative energy, the better it will be for all of us.

I find your line of thinking somewhat odd. Since you yourself are an american, and you value Alaska more than american lives, does that mean you'll stand on the firing line?

Then there is the "sooner the market. . . " part. I guess you never stopped to consider that we don't currently have a viable non-petrolium energy source other than Nuclear, market conditions or not.

[NorCalBaller88]

Originally Posted by careyman_462

Well, yeah, it is. But then again, tennis shoes and shorts contribute as well. Even if cars didn't burn fuel it takes a lot more to make and distribute them than bikes. You cannot get away from the fuel issue in this country unless you build your own house (using tools you built yourself), grow your own food that you found the seeds for in the wild, and kill wild animals with homemade weapons for food/clothing. It's a pretty dumb point/argument.

I don't care if you ride your bike or not. If it makes you feel better, then by all means do it. It's certainly going to save you a hell of a lot of money.

ha I wasn't serious. You can't buy anything that hasn't somehow needed fossil fuels to exist. er, anymore at least. Maybe when gas prices get high enough I can start a transport business that uses covered wagons pulled by oxen

I was just spouting bull**** because I thought his argument was ridiculous and over the top. Just as he thinks my future use of a road bike is hypocritical.

My beef is that someone who drives a ridiculous SUV probably doesn't have any regard for the amount they consume, whereas someone who drives a civic, prius, or say a vespa may be a little more conscience about it. I mean, I don't think there is much argument against the fact that we only have a limited amount of resources on this planet. I see the way americans in particular consume, and it's just insane. Go over to say, Europe, it's a totally different ball game over there. There isn't nearly the amount of waste, and general consumption in a person's day to day routine just seems way less than our own, on average. (sorry, don't have any actual numbers to back that one up, but being over there and actually observing people, it's pretty damn obvious.)

The stereotype of americans being fat/overweight isn't just a literal one; it's symbolic for our tendencies, on average, to be money/resource/material grubbing whores.

Originally Posted by SynTek

I find your line of thinking somewhat odd. Since you yourself are an american, and you value Alaska more than american lives, does that mean you'll stand on the firing line?

I don't think I quite get what you're trying to say here.... I've been moving all ****ing day so my mind is fried. and that might be an understatement.
So explain a little more.

Originally Posted by SynTek

Then there is the "sooner the market. . . " part. I guess you never stopped to consider that we don't currently have a viable non-petrolium energy source other than Nuclear, market conditions or not.

Bingo. We've got nuclear energy. But when was the last time we've commissioned a nuclear power plant?
It would be nice for people to take a better look at nuclear energy get over their fears from what went on during the cold war, and more specifically the nineteen 70s. Technology HAS advanced since then.

[Gatyr]

Originally Posted by NorCalBaller88

I don't think I quite get what you're trying to say here.... I've been moving all ****ing day so my mind is fried. and that might be an understatement.
So explain a little more.

He's asking if you would be willing you give your life to protect Alaska because you place Alaska's ecosystem above the lives of Americans (and presumably human life in general), and because you yourself are an American that is living.

[NorCalBaller88]

Word.

Maybe I didn't put that how I wanted to. He said something like "more americans will die" if we don't go in and drill for oil in alaska. I guess he was referencing our dependency on imperialism to get what we want at cost.

Hm. hahaha, I don't actually remember what i even meant by "keeping alaska pristine is more important than american lives". I'll tell you when it comes back to me.

But as far as sacrificing my own life to save it? Well, how COULD I die to save it? You mean for me to go up in front of congress and make a deal like "Yo, if you fools promise to make alaska a permanent nature reserve, I'll kill myself right now". ???

If I was actually put into that situation I'd have to say that my morals tell me that my self sacrifice would be the right thing to do. However, being the self-interested individual that I am, I don't see myself doing something hasty like that just yet.

[Gatyr]

A more probable situation would be you in front of the heavy machinery that is trying to accomplish something that coincides with the deterioration of the Alaskan ecosystem.

I'd lol if someone went before congress and said "yo" or referred to the members of the legislature as "fools" though. Haha, talk about the epitome of keepin' it real.