Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Perhaps you should re-read what followed post #8. what part of it do you think I ignored?
Straw man argument. Being against this legislation does not mean one is against all environmental regulations. Also, an honest discussion involves an objective look at trade offs and making informed decisions. In some cases environment regulation is clearly well worth the price. In the case of this legislation we will spend billions, hurt our economy and standards of living to, assuming there is an impact, lowering the average global temperature by a hypothetical .1 degree F. No honest objective case has been presented to justify this legislation, all they have done is use fear, by saying we will destroy the planet unless we do what they want, gee - that is a bad way to make decisions!
---------- Post added at 03:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:41 PM ----------
All 1,200 pages?
|
talk about ignoring arguments... It is really hard to discuss this issue if someone is not willing to discuss:
past experiences with cap and trade in the US (like the one to reduce acid rain)
effects of global warming
other effects of greenhouse gases. Like how increase in low level ozone may reduce soybean yelds by up to 20% by 2030...