Is entertainment and development more important than Earth's environment?
Please don't think i am attacking sports while giving your answer.
Answer:
There really is nothing to "ponder" these people can AFFORD to indulge in their sport. The fun police are intent on imposing their values on everyone else.
If you went to work one day a week you would earn enough to live, if you would call it living. You would as a consequence use up very little energy. Without a TV you would not be aware of NASCAR etc. problem solved.
If the people who claimed to be so concerned did this there would be plenty to go around the rest.
Better yet they could sail off the edge of the Earth and use even less energy.
"Not to mention the spectators"?
The spectators (driving to the event) are the great majority of the problem. If you want to ban racing you also need to ban baseball, soccer, and rock concerts. They're just as much of a problem as car racing.
We don't need to stop doing things to reduce global warming. Here's the plan:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...
http://www.ipcc.ch/spm040507.pdf...
If we do that, we're OK. Of course if we don't and global warming hits full force, we will wind up doing draconian things like banning large spectator events. But we don't have to go there.
Absolutely - otherwise we wouldn't be in this mess. Not to mention folks killing and dying for oil. Changing people's priorities is almost hopeless; it would require some sort of education - proven futile by the last two elections.
Overpopulation is the root of the problem actually, and we aren't up to handling that. That's why god made terrorists - to thin the heard. Wars are too clean and medicine is successful. And look how space migration has been brought to a near standstill.
I've also thought about the colossal waste of resources in things such as auto racing, but there is a big draw for these events, people are spending money like crazy to enjoy watching/participating in these, and it would be hard to not allow them (aside from perhaps regulating how clean the autos run, but not I'm not sure how even those regulations would work). I've wished that those things didn't happen, but to ban them in order to save fuel/reduce pollution would be kind of like banning excessive driving or rationing fuel to people. We have an open market and people are able to buy fuel and burn fuel in whatever quantities they want and it makes sense. It would be sort of like mandating that no recreational driving was allowed because we need to save gas for occupational driving and commuting. It just wouldn't fly. It's a tough thing I've thought about and felt like there was no answer to because as long as they can make a profit on it, NASCAR and other racing circuits will continue... I think a lot of racing development can potentially also help in developing technologies for street vehicles as well, so that is potentially a positive in the situation...
I kind of find it funny why anyone would want to ride around a large cirrcle 100 time or whateverin a 100 degrees . Its a big waste of time. But in development humans are trying to fit naturein there own view. What devlopement does is it creates a race among nations. This lead to more harm to mother nature.
i have pondered this myself. how about all these space missions? space is undoubtedly mysterious and interesting but is it really necessary? there are millions of tons of fuel used every year transporting shuttles (the huge conraption travels 3 miles per hour and i shudder to estimate it's mpg's) and getting them into the sky and bringing em down to earth again. just the other day Atlantis returned to earth and needed to take a detour to Cali. due to bad weather. the detour cost 1.7 million dollars and used tons of fuel.
we need to cut back on the extraneous use of fuel b/c we are polluting the world so much the weather is affected. can't ppl see the gravity of that? i live in Massachusetts and in early January there were two days in a row which were incredibly warm, first 59 degrees then 70! but the customers at the grocery store where i work were beaming, "wow, what a nice day!"
our own ignorance will surely be the death of us and to answer your question, apparently entertainment outweighs the environment to some people. take for instance Dr Phil and his personal airplane and john Travolta and his billion dollar collection of Boeing's and other jets. and now big screen lcd tv's which use so much energy new nuclear power plants will need to be built just to run them. then these two politicians who apparently don't like each other each took separate private airplanes to the same debate. hello! carpool you idiots. we are in BIG trouble.
Since human caused global warming is an invention of the left and Nascar is enjoyed primarily by those on the right, I am surprised that I haven't heard more about this earlier. Those on the left seem to have a problem with people enjoying themselves because they are governed by feelings of guilt and it isn't right for anyone to enjoy themselves. In 50 years from now, they will look back and laugh at those gullible enough to think that NASCAR is causing climate change. If you weren't serious, it would be a funny joke.
In order to prevent Global Warming that is caused by carbon dioxide emissions we would have to cut back worldwide carbon dioxide emissions by at least 90%
To accomplish that we would need a worldwide ban on the use of fossil fuels.
That would mean that we would have to ban all forms of motorized transportation. Essentially we would have to ban all automobiles, motorcycles, motorscooters, trucks, buses, trains, planes and all shipping world wide.
Next we would need to ban the generation of electricity by fossil fuels. That is most of the electricity that is currently produced.
Next we would need to ban all manufacturing, steel making and cement making.
Next we would need to ban the heating of homes, offices and factories, even when it is zero degrees outside.
Next we would need to ban the cooking of food and the heating of all water.
We would need to learn to bathe in cold water.
We would have to figure out how to enforce this ban worldwide.
Unfortunately the People's Republic of China has announced the will not voluntarily reduce their use of fossil fuels much less cooperate with an outright ban on the use of fossile fuels.
Unfortunately the People's Republic of China alone produces enough carbon dioxide to cause Global Warming.
We do not have the political will or the military capability to enforce a ban of the use of fossil fuels, in particular not against the People's Republic of China.
We cannot even handle Iraq.
How would we enforce a ban on fossil fuel use aganst the People's Republic of China, not to mention the rest of the world?
If you think that we in the United States are unpopular in the rest of the world now, just wait until you see the response that we would get if we tried to enforce a world wide ban on the use of fossil fuels.
That would really make us unpopular!
Yet, if we do not enforce such a ban, we cannot stop Global Warming that is caused by carbon dioxide emissions.
Essentially Global Warming that is caused by carbon dioxide emissions is inevitable. There is nothing that we can do to stop it.
HEY! We almost look the same!
As for your question, the impact on the environment from sport cars and such is nothing compared to the typical output from civilization and natural processes. It would not make any sense to target NASCAR unless it is part of a larger program to get people to give up civilization and go back to living in mud huts and eating meat raw. This is the only thing which will have any impact on the climate, if it is indeed changing in the first place. Dont think you'll get much support for that.
Actually, you ARE attacking sports. It's the spectators that are burning all the fuel. The average NASCAR event uses something like 6000 gallons of fuel - nothing compared to 10s of thousands who are burning one or two gallons attending a single event.
Try to find the silver lining. NASCAR will be moving to gasahol. Indy will be 100% alcohol soon. If these guys can make alternate an renewable fuels look cool - especially to a segment of the population that has historically NOT been environmentally conscious - then it will be well worth the expenditure in fuel.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: