"the great anonymous one wrote: "

**actually, UB Dan wrote it...thanks for the 'great' however. You should notice that in the very next post I apologized for forgetting to put in my name.

"Oh....I get it, I disagreed with you because you are a woman? Being offended is a convienient short cut to thinking... --I do not think of being offended as a short-cut to thinking. You yourself seem to think you were inviting me to "put you in your place" and clearly you were trying to provoke me. I am offended because you seemed to be saying that I obviously didn't know the "truth" abou tthe difference between "emmisions" of old vehicles versus new SUVs...and I don't think you are in a position to say that.

**I (UB Dan) was not trying to provoke you individually, I was trying to provoke discussion and reason. I may not have been in a position, in the past, to say you did not know emmission from vehicles from 1976 and newer, but I'm willing to place a good bet. BUT, you assume that this is a misogynistic opinion. SHAME ON YOU!! Get down off your cross, we need the sticks. I am willing to bet that 9 out of 10 people do not know the emmission ...myself included. Perhaps I was trying to provoke you into looking up the actual data, because I was too lazy, and I did leave myself an 'out' in case I was wrong (i.e. I never claimed that YOU would be suprised, I said ONE OF US would be surprised).

(In addition, The US has some of the strictist emmisions standards...catalytic converters are not required overseas. --and this would indeed be a bigger problem if those countries consumed as much petroleum as we did; they don't. Our strict "emmisions" standards don't mean shit if people are going to continue consuming massive amounts of fossil fuels to serve their own vanity or convenience...) "Is the problem the depletion of fossil fuels or the byproduct of using them? If its the by products than yes, emmision standards do mean something. I think you may underestimate the population of the world outside of the US and the number of vehicles that exist outside of the US."

--I am well aware of the population outside the US and how many of those people used cars compared to the US; if you read my earlier posts you'd see I comment on the fact that we as a nation consume far more resources per capita than anywhere else in the world; that's the point of this discussion...the US, as the biggest consumers of fossil fuels, should be the most willing to deal with the damage they have caused by this consumption.

**I was genuinely asking, is it the consumption alone or the pollution alone that causes the greatest concern? In other words would you prefer that we use more with less overall pollution or use less with more overall pollution. (ps still UB Dan).

(There are real problems that need to be solved, but a majority of the people on this thread are unwilling to recognize the bulk of history that existed prior to this year and have now concluded that all pollution is due to George W. Bush driving an SUV. --if you are really this simple-minded, blind and bull-headed it is not really worth debating with you...) "Do you mean it is because George W Bush drives an SUV or do you mean that global warming is not George Bush's fault."

--I meant, your reducing this to a ridiculous statement like the one above, and ascribing it to "most of the people" on this thread, is an example of your simple-mindedness and bull-headedness; which part of that do you not understand? Shall I type more slowly?

**Yes, it is a ridiculous statement...and it is hyperbole...but tell me that you, personally, blame neither George W. Bush nor SUV's for environmental problems.

--I personally believe calling someone "passive-aggressive" is itself VERY passive-aggressive.

**Then you are wrong. Calling someone passive aggressive is, if anything, aggressive. If I tried to pretend that I was a victim and that any disagreement with me was an attack on all women, volvo owners and left handed people....that would be passive aggressive.

There is nothing passive about me, jerk.

**Okeydokey...but you know there is some room in between passive-aggressive and hostile-and-insulting.

UB Dan

another from Carl Sagan: Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours. It's only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don't, others will. "