Well, folks, I think the OP has done well to make their case for the elimination of cars. I personally am still not swayed for the reasons I have posted in previous comments, and also agree with what others have said. I suggest that we all bid the OP farewell and wish them good luck in their quest to live forever, cancer free. Personally, I would rather die of cancer at the age of 80 than live forever in a world without cars, personal transportation, motorsports, or any of the other car-related indulgences I enjoy so much.
Agreed. The OP obviously enjoys tilting at windmills. I will give up my personal transportation when they pry it from my cold dead hands. A life lived in a bubble isn’t worth living.
As much as I know this will have no effect on CCC, I just have to say it:
" whereas their cars are spewing pollution harming and killing everybody."
A amazing exaggeration, part of why CCC has found no sympathetic ear here. I make the opposite case: Cars have saved, and are saving many thousands of lives every year, millions overall. Every society that has become able to buy cars, trucks, tractors, etc has seen their life expentancy skyrocket, resulting from better/more food, access to medical care, etc. If CCC were correct, US life expectancy should be plummeting, not rising.
There’s a very simple fix to prevent any automotive caused cancer. While it was not originally designed for this purpose, I’ve made a bunch of them for myself and my family members. We’re all 100% cancer free and would never think of leaving the house without them. While they may be crude they are very very effective.
So CCC, let me ask this.
Do you own a car or multiple cars?
Do you buy products that require shipment, no matter what those products may be?
You make them yourself? I had to buy mine!
How is this an exaggeration? Are you claiming that cars don’t kill anybody and don’t pollute? I think your notion tying increased life expectancy to the presence of cars in countries is the really far fetched claim here. Where are you getting this? Are you talking about past history or current third world countries? There is no way to attribute one to the other – the general increase in overall standards that would come at the same time as cars.
About your other point, I didn’t expect a sympathetic ear. Respectfully – and to use a well worn metaphor – those who refuse to see the elephant in the room can’t be expected to be receptive to descriptions of the elephant. I did expect a bit more rationality and civility than the messages below, however.
So, I’ll pass on the mockery and answer the questions.
I do not own a car. I do drive a car, but as little as possible. I lived car-free, in Europe where it is possible, for fifteen years.
I try to not use products that require extreme shipment. Fruits and vegetables shipped from other continents, for example. Local/national shipments by truck or mass transit buses are not the problem – it’s the mass commute by car that’s killing us.
I really got a kick out of one of the OP’s links they posted. It takes you to a Facebook fan page matching the OP’s user name. The photo album shows cars running and being driven in the dead of winter in Canada, which is supposed to illustrate how grossly polluting cars are, with their exhaust fumes creating huge gas clouds. Has anybody else noticed that humans “pollute” almost as much as cars do on a very cold winter day??? Look at all those “gas clouds” coming out of your mouth and nose every time you exhale! You should be ashamed of yourself!!!
Yes. What doesnt cause cancer. we should have stayed with horses and growing own gardens ect. Cars do cause cancer and look at the added problems with drilling for oil spills ect. Death to the oil industry. Solar power is heaven sent
Yes. What doesnt cause cancer. We should have stayed with horses and growing our own food. I dont believe horses need oil to be drilled n spilled. Solar Power is Heaven sent
For the record, it’s not my Facebook page. Did you read the info, and do you have any response to the points and arguments there?
I did not say it was your Facebook page, I just noted that the name of the fan page you linked to was called “Cars Cause Cancer” which is the same as your moniker on this forum. There is also no additional information on that Facebook fan page apart from what you have already pasted onto your comment after the hyperlink. The administrator for that page seems to have the same mindset and agenda you do, though. His response to someone’s comment that cars take us places was laughable, though not funny. “Cars take us places. Yeah, to heaven”.
As long as they don’t cause impotence. One must have one’s priorities in order.
So CCC, you use no products that are shipped from another continent, huh? Have you checked the tags on the back of the CPU and monitor you’re using; along with any DVD players, clothing, wall clocks, household bric-a-brac, etc. to see where it came from?
So you’re saying that everything you use is home brewed, huh?
Mass commuting may be practical for some people in certain places but it’s not here in the wide open spaces of OK where I live. It’s 25 miles to town, so do you suggest I run a double marathon to go in and back? Not that I would even make it halfway in; the coronary would occur before then.
I sincerely think there’s a lot of hypocrisy behind this issue and one can look no further than soon to be gone CA Govenor Arnold. A few years ago while touting his green car initiative he was going on and on about conserving fuel and saving the Earth.
When a reporter hit him with the fact that he owns and drives not one but a fleet of Hummers along with some high end gas guzzler cars his response was that he was not trying to tell anyone what to drive.
Paraphrasing a bit, he stated that “if you can afford to drive a Hummer or other gas guzzler then have at it”. Oh, so now it’s not about conserving fuel or saving the Earth at all; or even setting an example for the unwashed masses.
I don’t think the OP understands life in America, especially the sprawling, agricultural Midwest. I mentioned before on this thread that I, too, live in a small town in the Midwest with few conveniences. The nearest Walmart is 15 miles away and my daily commute to work is about 35 miles and takes me through four counties. There is no mass transit that will come to my town and take me to work, and if it did, it would probably cost more than I spend on fuel and upkeep to drive myself to work, not to mention take much longer.
For some reason, the theme of this thread reminds me of an article I read several years ago in, of all things, a muscle car magazine. This magazine would frequently report on the activities of the EPA, Greenpeace, and other organizations who had an agenda that posed a direct threat to the muscle car hobby. They mentioned one such organization, an extremist one, in which the members would protest the use of gas guzzling trucks and SUVs by going to car dealerships in the middle of the night and setting fire to vehicles or, in some cases, the entire dealership. That makes about as much sense as a skewed, exaggerated, overly direct and all exclusive statement like “cars cause cancer”. Does that make sense to the OP? It seems to me that setting fire to an H2 will cause more pollution in one fell swoop than the vehicle could have ever generated in its entire usable lifetime. Some environmentalists apparently do feel that a great way to protest pollution is to start a giant paint, oil, gasoline, rubber, and plastic fire. Doesn’t make sense to me.
There are a lot of causes of cancer. Let’s not single out one cause which is the effects of the car culture in our health. Car perse has the good and bad effects in our culture and health.
Sunlight, necessary for vitamin D production in excess causes cancer. Moderation is the key to longevity…in cars too. The negative effects of exhaust fumes is mitigated in the country, exacerbated in the city.
So, whether or not I have reposted the info from the Facebook page or not, do you have a response to those points and arguments?
So-called environmentalist torching cars makes no sense and is very toxic; same goes for the mass commute by car that creates the harmful air quality in the high-density cities where most of us live, and the lack of public transit within and between cities.
I’m happy for you that your lifestyle is working for you over there in Europe. Although I suspect that once you have a family it won’t work quite as well.
You do I hope realize that your premise that we over here in the U.S. should radically alter our entire lifestyle and out entire infrastructure to satisfy your desire for us to live the way you think we should is highly ethnocentric and, well, totally unrealistic? And you do realize that our infrastructure is considered a crutial reason that we successfully defeated the Germans in WWII and freed your ancestors over there in Europe? And I say that with the utmost respect for all those allied forces from everywhere that fought, died, and sacrificed along with us to achieve that victory. Greatness and sacrifice came from many nations.
You never answered my initial questions of how old you are and whether you have a family. I suspect I know why. My guess is that you’re a student and do not yet have one. I sincerely respect the altruism that comes with being young and able to live an untraditional life, without the demands and needs that a family man with a house has. As you grow up you’ll discover that it’s folly to judge others by your own needs. Much as it’s folly to judge our lifestyle, it would be folly for me to judge the indigenous peoples of South African regions, Australia, or South American countries. Or even Europe.
I wish you the best. Now focus on solving the problems in your own country. Leave me to my coupe and leave us to our highway system.