I assumed you have to drive. That's why I said that I was not serious about your part of the deal.
But if it turns out that smoking is significant, then I can't defend my bad habit towards the planet. But I may have been a bit too big mouthed. How do we define significant. This I have no idea about. Before I start looking into it, what do you suggest? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: 29. desember 2006 12:50 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Doomsday is coming upon us? I have to drive. I live in an area without public transportation, and my work is 40 miles from home. Paul On Dec 28, 2006, at 11:42 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote: > I'll make a bet. > If it turns out that I was wrong, then I'll give up smoking. > Will you stop driving if I'm correct? > > I'm serious about my commitment, but not about your part of the deal. > > > Tim > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Tim > Øsleby > Sent: 29. desember 2006 05:34 > To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' > Subject: RE: Doomsday is coming upon us? > > Honestly no. Not figures. But I'll look into it. > > While I do that, why don't you answer why you find this more important > than > cars? > > > Tim > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Paul > Stenquist > Sent: 29. desember 2006 05:16 > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Doomsday is coming upon us? > > I wasn't discussing your personal habits. I was discussing the > personal habits of the millions of cigarette smokers worldwide, many > of who reside in countries that are most critical of American habits > and practices. I'm not sure that the pollution they generate is > insignificant. Do you have facts and figures? > Paul > On Dec 28, 2006, at 11:04 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote: > >> If you won't to debate my personal habits, why don't pick something >> more >> important like the use of my car? >> >> I believe I know the answer to my question. >> >> >> Tim >> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Paul >> Stenquist >> Sent: 29. desember 2006 04:49 >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: Doomsday is coming upon us? >> >> I would guess that one smoker contributes very little to the >> generation of CO2. On the other hand, I would expect that millions or >> maybe even billions of smokers burning tobacco leaves all day long >> are a substantial part of the problem. I'm sure it should be part of >> this thread. Why wouldn't it be? >> Paul >> On Dec 28, 2006, at 10:10 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote: >> >>> To put it simple (I like it simple). Smoking is plain stupidity. >>> There many reasons why it is stupid. My personal life span is one >>> example. >>> You have listed several others. >>> >>> It is also an environmental problem. But not because of global >>> heating. The >>> impact on global heating is similar to the impact of a mouse fart. >>> The >>> environmental problem is in pesticides used when growing the >>> tobacco. The >>> other problem is all the chemicals used in making the end product. >>> But those >>> chemicals have no known impact on global heating. >>> >>> As I said. Bash on. I don't feel uncomfortable with it at all. But >>> please do >>> it in a thread unrelated to the global heating issue. >>> Title the thread Tim is a liar and thief if you want to ;-) >>> >>> >>> Tim >>> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>> Behalf Of Tom >>> C >>> Sent: 29. desember 2006 02:22 >>> To: pdml@pdml.net >>> Subject: RE: Doomsday is coming upon us? >>> >>>> Aren't we going OT now? >>>> >>>> I have an urge to say that I don't feel that my smoking habits are >>>> the real >>>> issue. To me, this seems like a smokescreen (pun intended) >>>> cowering the >>>> real >>>> debate. >>>> >>>> But by all means, bash on if you feel uncomfortable debating. >>>> >>>> >>>> Tim >>> >>> How can you go OT on an OT? :-) >>> >>> Actually I think Bill's point is relevant. Why? Because we tend to >>> view our >>> own behavior as acceptable and normal and expect others to do the >>> changing. >>> >>> However when the finger points back at us, we're uncomfortable. >>> >>> While little old you smoking X cigarettes a day may have a >>> negligible effect >>> >>> on pollution on a global scale (just like other single persons >>> taking long >>> showers or driving gas-guzzling SUV's), it has a much larger effect >>> when we >>> shrink the picture down a little or when we look at the cumulative >>> effect. >>> >>> Your behavior is clearly dichotomous... Wanting to save the planet >>> while at >>> >>> the same time almost assuredly shortening the time span of your >>> existence on >>> >>> it, both lessening your time to enjoy it and the time you might >>> have to make >>> >>> a difference. >>> >>> The cost in health care and missed productivity due to smoking >>> related >>> ailments is huge. Next calculate how much time and energy (human >>> and fossil >>> fuel) is wasted annually in an industry that essentially provides a >>> delivery >>> >>> method for a drug that induces a slow suicide. Then there's the >>> smoking >>> mothers whose babies may have future health issues and possible >>> lower IQ's, >>> putting a bigger drain on health care and education systems. >>> >>> I'm not bashing you. I'm not criticizing you. You work in the social >>> welfare field though and are sure aware of the implications of one's >>> personal behavior. OK, I just had to get that little one in. :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> On 12/28/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Tim Øsleby" Subject: RE: Doomsday is coming upon us? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Agreed. That's why I smoke outside rain or cold. You could argue >>>>>>> that I >>>>>>> pollute the environment. That's true, but I don't think it is >>>>>>> significant. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tim, this is pretty much the argument that you have been on the >>>>>> other side >>>>>> of. >>>>>> No one person makes a significant impact, so why should any one >>>>>> person >>>>>> change their habits, be it driving a large vehicle, taking long >>>>>> hot showers >>>>>> or whatever else they do that is environmentally harmful? >>>>>> >>>>>> William Robb >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> DagT >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
