Clean coal Companies

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by nathanm
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/incentivize

Thanks for your concern.

You're welcome. I don't agree with the popular trend to make adjectives out of adverbs out of nouns etc just by adding the seemingly correct endings.  I especially dislike verbification.

You got what you paid for in the free dictionary.  If I can find the time to waste, I'll look for it in a more recognized dictionary.  As someone said (maybe you), a web site can be found to support almost anything.

M-W not good enough for you?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incentivize

You can disagree with where language is going, I often do, but you can't really change it. Even the Oxford folks accept incentivize now.

I could have said 'incent,' but that died out soon after people started saying it in the early 80s, although it's still in a few dictionaries. Or I suppose I could have said 'create incentives for,' which probably would be your preference.

OK, I'll buy M-W.  You could have said motivate.  

Much of today's language trends sound pretentious when simpler language will convey the message better.  I think some of it is due to poor language skills.  The language guy in the Tulsa World editorial pages did an article about this a while ago. I can't rememeber his name right now.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by nathanm
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/incentivize

Thanks for your concern.

You're welcome. I don't agree with the popular trend to make adjectives out of adverbs out of nouns etc just by adding the seemingly correct endings.  I especially dislike verbification.

You got what you paid for in the free dictionary.  If I can find the time to waste, I'll look for it in a more recognized dictionary.  As someone said (maybe you), a web site can be found to support almost anything.

M-W not good enough for you?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incentivize

You can disagree with where language is going, I often do, but you can't really change it. Even the Oxford folks accept incentivize now.

I could have said 'incent,' but that died out soon after people started saying it in the early 80s, although it's still in a few dictionaries. Or I suppose I could have said 'create incentives for,' which probably would be your preference.

OK, I'll buy M-W.  You could have said motivate.  

Much of today's language trends sound pretentious when simpler language will convey the message better.  I think some of it is due to poor language skills.  The language guy in the Tulsa World editorial pages did an article about this a while ago. I can't rememeber his name right now.

I could have, although it doesn't have the connotation I was going for.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

I could have, although it doesn't have the connotation I was going for.

I like to choose my words carefully too.  You just found the wrong audience in me.

Words like incentivize are distracting to me. Next I begin to question the intelligence or education of the speaker. Then I start to ignore the speaker. By then the message is lost.  So much for connotation.  

Reports to the government are usually full of "those words".  Some of them are practically unreadable. Executives and politicians like "those words" because (they think) it makes them sound as if they know what they are talking about.

Some gobblety-gook speakers find such words incentivizing to use more like them. I do not.

Enjoy your vocabulary.  Maybe in another 20 or 30 years I'll find it less distracting, but probably not.

[sgrizzle]

Someone needs to better align their paradigms to achieve synergy.

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Someone needs to better align their paradigms to achieve synergy.

I practically taste the power of that statement...the power.

[we vs us]

Dunno.  I'm kind of into "incentivize."  "Motivation" doesn't capture the economic overtones you get when you verb "incentive." "Motivation" sounds like something you get from a seminar, or therapy, or a tent revival.  

Looking at how gimpy our economy is right now, and at how much the government is going to be, ahem, priming the pump in the coming year, I predict that we'll all become MUCH more familiar with "incentivize."

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Someone needs to better align their paradigms to achieve synergy.

I practically taste the power of that statement...the power.

The femtowatts.....

I expected a few comments from the peanut gallery.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm


We humans have not been on this planet for very long. Moreover, we humans have depended on agriculture to feed ourselves for even less time. What the earth was like before humans were around (or when we were few in number confined to a small area of the planet) is not necessarily a planet conducive to our survival.

My point exactly.  We are renting.

To think that we are producing lasting change that will destroy the earth is beyond arrogant.

It is obvious that the earth/universe/God/Allah/Greenspan is in control, and it will most certainly destroy us eventually with little action on our part.

To look at 100 years and run around in circles claiming that we are destroying the earth, is kinda like looking at the thermometer rise from 75 to 100 on a hot Oklahoma day and deducting that it will be over 600 degrees by the end of the day.  It would then follow that because you observe more postal workers delivering mail as the day progresses, that they are the cause of the terminal warming trend.  Oh no!  Everyone is going to die if we don't halt Postal Warming.

Logic defies most people.  

[sauerkraut]

I guess you can color me a bit old fashioned, but I believe we need to get all the engery we can from all sources for our nation, we need to bust away from OPEC. Let's use our own natural resources, (it also makes many good jobs). What good is having coal & oil in our country if it's off limits to drill and use? We may as well not have it at all and beg OPEC for our fuels. We need to use coal, drill for our oil where-ever there is a oil reserve we drill, we need to look into solar and wind and water, Nukes and expand battery and electric cars, we need to go all out. Right now we need oil so that means drilling. We need coal, We need more nuke plants, that could be our base and we work and expand out from there.

[cannon_fodder]

This new "Save the Planet" crap is so damn arrogant.  To think that we insignificant beings might destroy the planet.  Is the Earth warming, are we polluting too much, is our farm land ruined?  I don't know one way or another.

But I'll tell you this;  no matter what we did or continue to do -  the planet will be fine.  It has dealt with volcanoes, earth quakes, meteors, massive floods, freezing, and everything else.  It has a thousand nuclear explosions a second at the center of it.  Far worse than we can do.  And it seems just fine to me, not going anywhere.

Now, the PEOPLE.  The people might be f***ed.  We'll probably screw this place up good enough that we all die off.  But the planet, I'm fairly confident the planet will be just fine.

- George Carlin (something like that)  []

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

This new "Save the Planet" crap is so damn arrogant.  To think that we insignificant beings might destroy the planet.  Is the Earth warming, are we polluting too much, is our farm land ruined?  I don't know one way or another.

But I'll tell you this;  no matter what we did or continue to do -  the planet will be fine.  It has dealt with volcanoes, earth quakes, meteors, massive floods, freezing, and everything else.  It has a thousand nuclear explosions a second at the center of it.  Far worse than we can do.  And it seems just fine to me, not going anywhere.

Now, the PEOPLE.  The people might be f***ed.  We'll probably screw this place up good enough that we all die off.  But the planet, I'm fairly confident the planet will be just fine.

- George Carlin (something like that)  []

I could not agree more, man is like a gnat on the face of the planet and he's helpless against mother nature, man cannot even control a rain storm, flood, blizzard, cold snaps, or droughts. The planet has been around for 4.5 BILLION Years and man is nothing on that time scale. The planet survived comet hits, astroid strikes, and metor hits and it's still here. The planet suffered many severe volcano erruptions that put more toxic dust in the air in one eruption than what man could do in 1,000 years. The planet has lasted 4.5 billion years and it will still be here long after man is gone. As for global warming FairBanks, Alaska is suffering some the coldest weather ever,  they have been getting -50 below zero -without wind chill. Car tires go flat and crack, propane gas won't vaporize in temps below -40 below zero. The people of Fairbanks, Alaska who are used to the cold weather are having a hard time coping it's so cold. Al Gore needs to show them where the ice is melting. Grand Rapids Michigan is buried under 5' of global warming white stuff. The high temps in MN are below zero.

[we vs us]

The question isn't whether we'll kill off the planet or not.  The question is whether we'll kill off its ability to support us.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

The question isn't whether we'll kill off the planet or not.  The question is whether we'll kill off its ability to support us.

Exactly.  []

Hence the mockery of "save the planet."

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

The question isn't whether we'll kill off the planet or not.  The question is whether we'll kill off its ability to support us.

Exactly.  []

Hence the mockery of "save the planet."

Aha.  I thought I detected a strong whiff of satirical get-off-my-lawnism.

[Gaspar]

Today's report about Sea Ice levels remaining the same for the past 30 years in spite of unsubstantiated claims to the contrary, and Al Gore's "claymation" videos of polar bears drowning, reinforces my belief that we are going to need a hell of a lot more Tanqueray!



. . . and a much larger ice pick.