Re: my comment and points to consider

["Van Walbek" <mwalbek@nc.rr.com>]

Before I answer some of your points, I might point out that you advocated
SHOOTING 'Republican Conservative Militants' . And have the nerve to accuse
me of Replublican venom? You really need to look in a mirror.
I hate to be the one to break the news to you but  "From each according to
his ability, to each according to his needs" has been tried several times
this century and it doesn't work.
 As far as 'Republican education',  I need to tell you, the Republicans have
been in power in the State and National legislatures very little.  It's
amazing how education has disintegrated in just 1.5 yrs. (/sarcasm)
 If you want to give up air conditioning, heat, automobiles, lights, etc.
then your plan will work. I and I'll bet most everyone of this thread will
not.
 When you come up with an answer to the energy problem call me.  As it now
stands we need more resources.
 Ethanol is not an answer.  When you factor the energy required to produce
it, it's a wash.
Hydrogen requires enormous amounts of energy to produce. and it also emits,
when burned, the NUMBER ONE greenhouse gas,, water vapor.
 Wind power?  There is now a lot of concern over towers killing millions of
migrating birds.  Imagine a windmill 'farm' with turning blades.
 Solar? Very expensive at present.  And how many sq. miles of panels?
Fuel cells? They have to have a fuel.  Right now the plan is natural gas.
Drilling again, similar to oil wells. Hydrogen? See above
The one energy source that could fill the gap is nuclear.  And I'm sure you
are dead set against it.
 If we used wood stoves to heat, the air pollution would be unacceptable.
 So tell me, other than giving up the comforts of life, what's the answer?
BTW  if you don't have an IRA or 401k as a retirement income, you are crazy.
Don't count on Big Brother to take care of you.
Can we please talk birds now?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Harrold, Eric S" <esharrol@email.uncc.edu>
To: "'Van Walbek '" <mwalbek@nc.rr.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:55 PM
Subject: RE: my comment and points to consider


> Now, now Van...what happened? Did that money market account bonk out on
ya?
> That stock portfolio not lookin' so hot? Maybe its all those damn taxes or
> maybe its that dubya ain't gonna get to tickle his lil oil executives'
> tummies with what little is up in ANWR.
>
> Yes, I have "worked" for a living at a textile mill where conservative
> executive trash doesn't want to properly care for the health of its
> employees or take a financial cut over environmental issues. Yeah, I've
been
> down that road, don't care to go back. I've also seen the product of
> Republican education (ooops....oxymoron there) systems which is ignorant
> rural trash that will only be able to go to work in the factories and
mills.
> Yeah, some segments of our society "work" to much. Let's "work" like in
the
> olden days, where things weren't revolutionized and we didn't have such a
> "latest technology-driven" society. I for one would be all for a return to
a
> more ecologically, and thus bird friendly standard of living.
>
> So before you go spewing your conservative venom, think about the
> consequences of those in your camp that don't even think about the needs
of
> birds or anything other than something they can exploit for financial
gain.
> Are conservatives living within their ecological means? Are they allowing
> anyone else to?
>
> Eric Harrold
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Van Walbek
> To: Harrold, Eric S
> Cc: carolinabirds@duke.edu
> Sent: 5/8/02 6:33 PM
> Subject: Re: my comment and points to consider
>
> While it would be nice to play with animals and get paid, some of us
> actually have to , gasp...gasp...WORK for a living at gasp... gasp... a
> big
> nasty business.
>  Now if you want to debate the pros and cons of ANWR, bring it on.
>  Frankly, I come to this site to read about birds, but my other passion
> is
> politics and I don't think we would see eye to eye.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harrold, Eric S" <esharrol@email.uncc.edu>
> To: <carolinabirds@duke.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 9:54 PM
> Subject: my comment and points to consider
>
>
> > Folks who interpreted my ending comment to Mike as a light-hearted
> joke on
> > my part are in the right frame of mind as far as what I meant with it
> in
> > terms of the post.
> >
> > For those who don't like to discuss politics (as they relate to any
> topic),
> > allow me to make a couple of points:
> >
> > 1) I think the recently debated ANWR drilling issue serves as evidence
> that
> > there is a strong dichotomy between the two major political entities
> in
> this
> > country with respect to how they view and handle natural resource
> issues
> and
> > would of course include birds
> >
> > 2) I will hold conservative birders accountable when the last Cerulean
> > Warbler, Golden-winged Warbler, and Piping Plover disappear just as I
> will
> > hold conservative hunters/falconers accountable when the last wild
> > populations of Bobwhite (almost the case now) and Sage Grouse are
> > extirpated.
> >
> > 3) If birders, falconers, and hunters (Yes I realize that this is a
> birding
> > forum) can't or won't meaningfully discuss politics as they pertain to
> avian
> > conservation issues then the future is anything but bright.
> >
> > 4) I have observed Will to state that Carolinabirds is for the
> discussion
> of
> > topics pertaining to birds and birding in the Carolinas. As politics
> > ultimately affect birds and their future, I don't see why it wouldn't
> be
> > appropriate to have deep, thought-provoking discussions on this forum
> if
> one
> > chose to. As Will is the owner/moderator, perhaps he could give us his
> > perspective on the subject.
> >
> > 5) Why do we need "thought police" when we have what's called a delete
> > button????
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Eric Harrold
> > Charlotte, NC