The issue must be explored by all responsible groups. however I have caught both Greenpeace the Sierra Club lying to the public over issues where they have dogmatic positions - ie. Nuclear Power.
Both groups are fully aware that the risk is miniscule to the point of nonexistant in Canada. They still speak of meltdowns and radioactive steam / rain knowing full well both are physically impossible with a Candu reactor.
How can we trust them over the Tar Sands?
Telefunken
Posted on: 05/28/2009 15:49
The issue is not about meltdowns, but what to do with the tons of highly radioactive fuel left over from the process. I do not want nuclear power in Alberta until a viable solution for waste reclamation is in place. Burying it for future generations to worry about is not an option in my opinion.
BrettA
Posted on: 05/31/2009 19:26
This poll isn't realistic. "Church leaders" doing anything vis-a-vis the Oil Sands other than looking at matters theological shouldn't occur - unless they're properly cross-trained (in this case, things like environmentalism and ethics). But I couldn't respond "No" because the very narrow reason you stated wasn't valid.
FlatTax
Posted on: 06/15/2009 14:13
Didn't Christ advocate not getting involved with worldly affairs?
Comments
AaronMcGallegos
Posted on: 05/18/2009 20:09
Do you think church leaders should investigate energy production at Alberta's tar sands?
Links for more information:
Church Leaders Delegation to Alberta Tar Sands (KAIROS)
Tar Sands: Now Even the Church is Opposed (The Wall St. Journal)
SLJudds
Posted on: 05/23/2009 18:12
The issue must be explored by all responsible groups. however I have caught both Greenpeace the Sierra Club lying to the public over issues where they have dogmatic positions - ie. Nuclear Power.
Both groups are fully aware that the risk is miniscule to the point of nonexistant in Canada. They still speak of meltdowns and radioactive steam / rain knowing full well both are physically impossible with a Candu reactor.
How can we trust them over the Tar Sands?
Telefunken
Posted on: 05/28/2009 15:49
The issue is not about meltdowns, but what to do with the tons of highly radioactive fuel left over from the process. I do not want nuclear power in Alberta until a viable solution for waste reclamation is in place. Burying it for future generations to worry about is not an option in my opinion.
BrettA
Posted on: 05/31/2009 19:26
This poll isn't realistic. "Church leaders" doing anything vis-a-vis the Oil Sands other than looking at matters theological shouldn't occur - unless they're properly cross-trained (in this case, things like environmentalism and ethics). But I couldn't respond "No" because the very narrow reason you stated wasn't valid.
FlatTax
Posted on: 06/15/2009 14:13
Didn't Christ advocate not getting involved with worldly affairs?