I originally posted this on a friend's website and thought it was blog worthy...whatever, is anything I write on here really blogworthy?? It was in response to his comments on the sky rocketing gas prices and his thoughts on how we should stop the hysterics and why we should seek drilling in Alaska....my retort:
"I totally agree with your point about Alaska. What do I care about conserving the wildlife in Alaska for when I'm paying nearly $4.00 a gallon for gas? At these prices I will never get to see first hand the marvelous nature way north that we have so desperately preserved since I'm fucking broke!!!
God forbid I can afford to put gas in my car so I can go to work and make a living and pay my bills, and support my family, but at least we have preserved mother nature...right? FUCK YOU, you god damned tree huggers!!! Who gives a rat's ass about a nice tree or a beautiful landscape in the middle of bumblefuck around the arctic circle when anything and everything that's important in the world is south of Canada and the fucking camel fucking towel heads are ass raping us for importing their sand cricket oil. Eat me you fucking Liberal dip shits! It's a fucking a tree...there are billions and billions of them and guess what...we can grow more. What fucking purpose does a penguin serve anyway? Are they even part of the god damned food chain?? Has anybody ever eaten a penguin? Do penguins help the environment? They can't even fly!!! Will the ecosystems of the world shut down with the lack of Chilly Fucking Willy?? We seem to be doing just fine without the Dodo bird! Hey if it means I can fill my tank and spend less then $20 doing it once again, then cut the trees, relocate the fat birds, and let's start digging for some Alaskan tea...OIL THAT IS!!!!"
9 comments:
Hmmmmm. while i undertand your position, I still believe you are misguided. Forget oil - we need new forms of energy (not a fucking bandaid). consider this-->the US Geological Service estimates less than a year's supply of oil from the region AND it would take 10 years for it to reach the market. Then when production peaks (by 2027 - it would account for 1-2% of America daily consumption. We need American ingenuity - not more oil.
Anonymous eh??? Would be nice if the critics of this board would at least state their name
i own ten 7-11's and i'm very offended by your comments
You actually have the balls to say "liberal dip shits" when you obviously haven't done a fucking bit of research into this? That seriously frightens the living fuck out of me (I'm assuming you're a registered voter)…
Note that I'll cite references here instead of pulling things out of my ass.
1 – Drilling for oil in Alaska is not a long term solution:
(Union of Concerned Scientists) Drilling in the refuge would provide a very short-term solution for a long-term problem. A recent government study estimates that 3.2 billion barrels of oil could be economically recovered from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This is only enough oil to fuel the US vehicle fleet for a mere 6 months. Alternatively, it could supply US industrial, commercial, residential, and power generation needs for 17 months (and that's at 1998 consumption levels). Why plunder the last true US wilderness for such a paltry return?
2 – ”Who gives a rat's ass about a nice tree or a beautiful landscape in the middle of bumblefuck around the arctic circle when anything and everything that's important in the world is south of Canada”?
Let’s try to figure out how “everything that’s important in the world being south of Canada”. (btw, Canada is our largest supplier of Oil, not the “fucking towel heads” (racist much?)(National Resource Defense Center or even more information)). We need to actually take a step back for just a second.
The effects of global warming have been directly attributed to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Here’s a little pic from that shows what we’re dumping into the air and what is needed to offset it all for one year of dumping:
JUST PLANT A FEW TREES, RIGHT?
Trees draw carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere through photosynthesis, so one potential way to offset some greenhouse-gas emissions is to plant more forests. But most trees don’t sequester significant amounts of carbon during the first few years after planting. Moreover, when trees succumb to forest fires or begin to decay, they release carbon back into the atmosphere. An acre of fast-growing softwood trees, such as pines, can take in as much as 5 tons of carbon dioxide a year as they enter their peak years of growth at around age 15. Hardwood trees grow more slowly but tend to keep their carbon locked away longer. An acre of walnut trees, for example, can take in as much as 2.2 tons of carbon dioxide a year as the trees enter their peak years of growth at around age 25. The graphic below gives a rough indication of how many walnut trees would have to be planted—and allowed to mature for at least 25 years—to offset the carbon emissions of a typical family of four and the nation at large from just one year.
see pic
50 million acres of trees to offset ONE YEAR’S worth of crap we’re dumping into the atmosphere... (btw, the state of Kansas is 52 million acres so you can get a rough idea of just how much land we're talking about)
What’s the most current reason for gas prices to be as high as they are and for some places to not have gas at all? It’s because we lost refineries from Katrina.
Hrm… Studies have shown that we have seen an increase in natural disasters from 100 a year in the 1960’s to 500-800 a year currently. As well:
(Science Journal) The best science to date suggests the frequency of hurricanes doesn't reflect global warming. Straightforward physics, however, says their intensity might. As the seas and air warm, there is more evaporation, which fuels storms, and more energy available to pump them up. A new analysis by atmospheric physicist Kerry Emanuel of MIT suggests the net power of tropical cyclones (hurricanes and Pacific typhoons), a combination of the energy they pack and how long they last, "has increased markedly since 1970."
The power of storms in the North Atlantic has tripled, while the power of those in the western North Pacific has more than doubled.
Similarly, a 2004 study from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J., part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, found that a warmer world is likely to deepen hurricanes' central pressure (a measure of their power) and intensify the rainfall they bring. Today's storms, the scientists write, "may be upstaged by even more intense hurricanes over the next century as the earth's climate is warmed by increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere."
So, yeah, let’s do the following:
1. clear Alaskan wildlands for oil since we’re paying so much for gas right now
2. pump more CO2 into the atmosphere
3. Affect the weather patterns more
4. cause further destruction like Katrina due to an increase in natural disasters like this
5. Bitch then about:
a. how many more people have died (reading this blog, I’m not sure this one would cross your radar)
b. how even more expensive our gas is
c. how even more expensive our electricity is
i. if we even have it
d. How the trees are dying because it’s too damn hot to sustain them:
i. Which will dump more CO2 into the air (they don’t get rid of CO2, they store it)
ii. Which will further decrease our ability to clear CO2 from the air
iii. Buy stock in hand baskets
anonymous above pegged it. Do more research and look into alternative sources. Did you have no response to that other than 'state your name'?
Great call.
Me? I’m going to go BBQ a penguin and hug a fucking tree.
btw, the pic (and the huge URL) is from Discover.com. tried repeatedly to fix that link but blogspot doesn't like it for some reason.
My dearest Major Yoshi.... No need to offer continued comments about links and pictures you provided me in this blog for I have not looked at one of them nor do I care to. You seem to miss the entire point of my website. (And people say Corporate Techies have no sense of humor) The difference between you and me is simple...I get sarcasm and understand humor where you like to read crap like "The Union of Concerned Scientists" to retain a bunch of useless knowledge that you can only use to make yourself look like a pathetic loser when not getting "The Joke"! I really hope you do not read any of the other ridiculously lame and moronic things I write on here if the penguin bashing Alaskan oil crisis piece I wrote got you that fired up. Maybe you should just lighten up, get a clue, and stop being such a fucking tool!
I had no response to my anonymous poster because this is not a forum for intellectual debate...it's a site about nonsense, sex, making fun of each other, and occasionally...just occasionally, getting a laugh! I had no basis for arguing because like you pointed out, I gave no facts in my piece. Had I known my literature was going to be under review by the Nobel Prize Committee I would have thrown a few foot notes and ibids in there.
I appreciate the time and effort you put into all your statistics, Major Yoshi, but you're barking up the wrong tree..... oh no I said tree! Fuck me, I hate to use a deciduous in the name of vane.
I look forward to more comments by you...I enjoyed skimming through 90% of the crap you wrote to me!
Toodles.......
the japanimation freak is wrong. we do NOT get the majority of our oil from canada.
i usually disagree with yurri, because he is a big giant douche, but in this case he makes some good points. go yurri!!!! keep up the good work
Post a Comment