You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
Equating the energy source with the lowest death/kwh with the most dangerous weapons ever created, demonstrates at best willful ignorance. In a world where climate change is becoming more and more obvious, where a solar backbone has been elusive for over 50 years, hamstringing the real options we may one day need is recklessly irresponsible. Her ignorance could be cured in a mere hour consultation with legitimate experts.
Equating the energy source with the lowest death/kwh
oil is not the energy source with the lowest death/kwh
are you saying you think we should go to war over oil?
I just have no idea how you got there.
and how does this tie in with climate change?
Vilifying the tools we may need to combat climate change makes it far more likely. We don't have access to solar power that can be mass produced, with no unpleasant waste by-products, that can handle the load of the world; until we do, we should talk responsibly about the technologies that we do have. Jill Stein speaks about nuclear energy more ignorantly than someone who has yet sat in a classroom on the subject for 5 minutes. Its rare that a view can be so simplistically wrong, that a facebook meme can correct it this thoroughly. There are thousands of experts around the world that could have corrected her misconceptions, many of which would have probably done so for free, in an hour of education she seems to desperately need. This unwillingness to defer to those with expertise, on a matter of consequence, should be more embarrassing than those that deny climate change, especially as the variables of concern are largely much more demonstrable than those relating to changes in the atmosphere.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] gbiota1 ago
Equating the energy source with the lowest death/kwh with the most dangerous weapons ever created, demonstrates at best willful ignorance. In a world where climate change is becoming more and more obvious, where a solar backbone has been elusive for over 50 years, hamstringing the real options we may one day need is recklessly irresponsible. Her ignorance could be cured in a mere hour consultation with legitimate experts.
[–] hunter3 [S] ago
are you saying you think we should go to war over oil? and how does this tie in with climate change?
[–] gbiota1 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
oil is not the energy source with the lowest death/kwh
I just have no idea how you got there.
Vilifying the tools we may need to combat climate change makes it far more likely. We don't have access to solar power that can be mass produced, with no unpleasant waste by-products, that can handle the load of the world; until we do, we should talk responsibly about the technologies that we do have. Jill Stein speaks about nuclear energy more ignorantly than someone who has yet sat in a classroom on the subject for 5 minutes. Its rare that a view can be so simplistically wrong, that a facebook meme can correct it this thoroughly. There are thousands of experts around the world that could have corrected her misconceptions, many of which would have probably done so for free, in an hour of education she seems to desperately need. This unwillingness to defer to those with expertise, on a matter of consequence, should be more embarrassing than those that deny climate change, especially as the variables of concern are largely much more demonstrable than those relating to changes in the atmosphere.
https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481
https://www.facebook.com/weneedprogress/photos/a.1730083073916873.1073741828.1730073463917834/1753544254904088/?type=3&theater