<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quote of the Day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://us.arevablog.com/2009/11/19/quote-of-the-day-21/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://us.arevablog.com/2009/11/19/quote-of-the-day-21/</link>
	<description>Next Energy Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 15:29:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon Filiatrault</title>
		<link>http://us.arevablog.com/2009/11/19/quote-of-the-day-21/comment-page-1/#comment-201</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Filiatrault</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:24:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://us.arevablog.com/?p=1292#comment-201</guid>
		<description>Some comments:
-- Quote
   “I think climate change is real. You don’t? That’s your business.
-- End Quote

People who do not believe in the reality of climate changes need to get their facts straighten out.  We have had ice ages and now luckily for us we live in a descent warm period.

I think that the debate is more on the anthropogenic CO2 vs. temperature, since in the past 10 years the globe did not see any warming and CO2 as been going up, and since the anthropogenic signature of CO2 vs. the green house effect is only 0,117%.  So no wonder many are questioning the blind faith of CO2 from humans are going to destroy our planet earth.
Using the climate change excuse to push the use of nuclear is in my opinion, very dangerous.  There are more down to earth, common sense reasons to do so.

One is the fact that using lower density energies do not make sense for the physical economy.  I am not talking about Wall Street economy here. Second, we will not have fossil fuels forever.  Third, if you want to give 10 billion people, the energy that the average North Americans are using, then using anything else than nuclear is suicidal.

-- Quote:
So either the opponents of a serious energy/climate bill with a price on carbon don’t care about our being addicted to oil and dependent on petro-dictators forever or they really believe that we will not be adding 2.5 billion more people who want to live like us, so the price of oil won’t go up very far…
-- End quote.

This quote is so wrong.  Do we really need a crazy complex energy/climate bill to make us (humans on the planet) realize some common sense concept of energy density and physical economy.
As an adult with kids, I don&#039;t need to be told be some group (running those bills, ie: Dad) that I should stop polluting and start using cleaner, more reliable/denser sources of energy.  I can think for myself and educate my kids to think for themselves and participate in a new generation that would not need to be told... &quot;Don&#039;t do that, it is not good for you.&quot;

I think the problem is education.  We are so dumb down as a population that we cannot even use a 5$ pocket calculator to figure out ourselves that anything else than nuclear will not work.

So good luck to all of us... And please, teach common sense, backed by good science to all.

Simon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some comments:<br />
&#8211; Quote<br />
   “I think climate change is real. You don’t? That’s your business.<br />
&#8211; End Quote</p>
<p>People who do not believe in the reality of climate changes need to get their facts straighten out.  We have had ice ages and now luckily for us we live in a descent warm period.</p>
<p>I think that the debate is more on the anthropogenic CO2 vs. temperature, since in the past 10 years the globe did not see any warming and CO2 as been going up, and since the anthropogenic signature of CO2 vs. the green house effect is only 0,117%.  So no wonder many are questioning the blind faith of CO2 from humans are going to destroy our planet earth.<br />
Using the climate change excuse to push the use of nuclear is in my opinion, very dangerous.  There are more down to earth, common sense reasons to do so.</p>
<p>One is the fact that using lower density energies do not make sense for the physical economy.  I am not talking about Wall Street economy here. Second, we will not have fossil fuels forever.  Third, if you want to give 10 billion people, the energy that the average North Americans are using, then using anything else than nuclear is suicidal.</p>
<p>&#8211; Quote:<br />
So either the opponents of a serious energy/climate bill with a price on carbon don’t care about our being addicted to oil and dependent on petro-dictators forever or they really believe that we will not be adding 2.5 billion more people who want to live like us, so the price of oil won’t go up very far…<br />
&#8211; End quote.</p>
<p>This quote is so wrong.  Do we really need a crazy complex energy/climate bill to make us (humans on the planet) realize some common sense concept of energy density and physical economy.<br />
As an adult with kids, I don&#8217;t need to be told be some group (running those bills, ie: Dad) that I should stop polluting and start using cleaner, more reliable/denser sources of energy.  I can think for myself and educate my kids to think for themselves and participate in a new generation that would not need to be told&#8230; &#8220;Don&#8217;t do that, it is not good for you.&#8221;</p>
<p>I think the problem is education.  We are so dumb down as a population that we cannot even use a 5$ pocket calculator to figure out ourselves that anything else than nuclear will not work.</p>
<p>So good luck to all of us&#8230; And please, teach common sense, backed by good science to all.</p>
<p>Simon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

