And what degree or education do you have that makes you qualified to make such sweeping claims about the science, the scientists, and their methods? A B.S. in Googling?

Yeah, you're right. Let's do nothing.

__________________
An employee gets trampled to death by a frenzied, greedy mob at a Walmart sale, and customers actually complained when the store closed. Yet, I'm the bad guy for suggesting policies that assume people act like retarded herd animals that need government nannying and control....

This points to their true agenda: they want less humans on earth.

Not quite. I have long been an advocate for nuclear power, electric to hydrogen, exploitation of oil and natural gas reserves within US boundaries. All the other stuff that the environuts tout, like conservation, wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, bio-fuels, should be exploited as well, but they are all minor contributors to the overall energy budget.

Hydro, changes habitat, it doesn't destroy it. Unless you think that fish aren't able to live in lakes (that form behind the dams). Fish actually thrive in the lakes that form behind dams.

Solar...since when has people's roofs been farmland, or the desert, that's not farmland either.

Biofuels aren't required to be made by corn or food, they can be made by swtichgrass (which grows on land that can't sustain corn, and so food land isn't comprimised) or algae, which can easily to upgraded and added to existing power plants to recycle the CO2.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

Well, many dam projects have involved flooding vast areas of formerly dry land, killing many plants and animals. In some cases, changing a habitat involves destroying one to make another.

__________________

Nature does the same thing, so really there is nothing wrong with it (naturally speaking).

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

Well, yea, it wouldn't be unheard of naturally, but it's still not something you want to encourage if you have alternatives. I don't see how "nature does it" would make it acceptable in those situations. Nuclear power probably causes less harm. Everything we do causes some harm, so it's unavoidable. I just think whatever we do, we should try to minimize our footprint in the process.

__________________

Changing a habitat to one that animals can still thrive in, or leaving toxic waste that would kill anything that might get incontact with it, even if it is small in amount and safely buried in containers. Which one is really better for nature?

Even so, that still leaves Solar and Biofuel as means for energy.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

Nuclear energy is not an option. It is being pushed by billionaire energy corporations because they can basically monopolize the energy source. Many people expected Yucca Mountain to become our national nuclear waste site, but now there is evidence it sits on a fault line and it is also tied up in court with numerous lawsuits.

We could also cover huge areas of desert in the Western states with the new solar panels using fresnel lenses and or the nanotechnology.

Corn ethanol and sugar based ethanol needs to be abandoned and replaced by either sugar and cellulose based ethanol from the new hybrid corn that has enzymes to break down the cellulose so the whole plant can be used or switchgrass, which can be grown on marginal crop land.

__________________
National Debt =