18 total posts
Missed the most important part...
NO government force required.
BUT, it is rather slanted. Look at the language...brewed with a conscience implies other brewers have no conscience. corporate soul is still very much intact a value judgment in a news story?
Wouldn't they be better stewards if they brewed no beer at all? In fact, wouldn't the ultimate way to reduce your carbon impact on the environment be to commit suicide?
RE: reduce your carbon impact
reduce your carbon impact on the environment be to commit suicide?
Now that's just silly
Dead people don't use resources, in fact they add to the soil. If there were far fewer people on the planet the impact would be far less. That is unquestionable.
This is the ultimate conclusion of the logic of the "greens". If they are to be taken seriously at all, they ought to consider it.
You don't think
You don't think blowing yourself up is silly? (actually it's stupid) but I'll use the term silly, since you've used the term before, and imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.
You could be a potential suicide bomber.
Some are paying $25,000 You could invest in carbon credits.
I don't advocate blowing yourself up...
There are other ways that would be cleaner. But it's not MY philosophy, it's the greens'.
So, yes, it's stupid. That's my point.
RE: But it's not MY philosophy, it's the greens'.
Green philosophy is to blow themselves up, OK if you say so.
I didn't say any such thing, as you well know...
why distort and fabricate?
In fact, wouldn't the ultimate way to reduce your carbon impact on the environment be to commit suicide?
Then you make that Their philosophy.
Green philosophy is to commit suicide.
No broken links please. (DM take note)
Reductio ad absurdum -
No proof necessary. It is the logical conclusion to the idea that the "carbon footprint" or "environmental impact" of each individual should be reduced as much as possible.
I asked, wouldn't the ultimate way to reduce your carbon impact on the environment be to commit suicide?
I also said, If there were far fewer people on the planet the impact would be far less. That is unquestionable. Am I wrong?
How do you think they "add to the soil"?
By use of resources, either natural or man-made.
You know, by decomposing....
returning nutrients to the earth. Food for the worms. I'm assuming a "green" would not use on of those metal casket monstrosities and go natural...
A bit off topic, but.......Careful what you ask for.
The way things are going, soylent green may be in our future.
Mmmmmmmmm, People !!!!
Yeah! I like the brains.....................................
High five ED,
I agree, would like to compare the carbon footprint of making their product versus not making the product. I will just guess that making the product is higher.
Reductio ad absurdum
Monkey see, monkey doo