Greenhouse effect ???

[MikePA]

Sorry, Moss, as I said to John, we disagree.

I do not buy the argument that because we can pollute in a micro environment we can do it on a macro level and then jump to the conclusion that we can cause global warming, then jump to the decision we have to fix it.

And before someone (not you Moss) leaps to the conclusion that because I don't believe man causes global warming that I must be for dirty air, dirty water, pro-polution, etc. I am not. We are called to be stewards of the earth.

As I mentioned in my first post and will again on this my last post, academic discussions are fine, my concern arises when economics enters the equation.

 

[JimR]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( <font color="blue"> tell me there isn't something going on with the weather,It should be zero or close to it at this time of year. </font>

You are having a warm spell...report back later this week and tell me what the weather is like ... /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif )</font>


Not true. It's been like this for a few weeks now. That is not a warm spell. This week they are already predicting much warmer than normal temperatures again. My heating bill loves it. But something is wrong for sure. I don't even think the ground is frozen anymore.

 

[JimR]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">( <font color="blue"> tell me there isn't something going on with the weather,It should be zero or close to it at this time of year. </font>

You are having a warm spell...report back later this week and tell me what the weather is like ... /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif )</font>

Absolutely,plenty of cold,snow and ice left in the years to come in this warming global climate.Getting a little snow here right now. )</font>

While you getting snow in KY., we are getting 2 inches of rain in MA. It has been weird weather this whole winter up here in the N.E. From the forecasts that I have seen, spring is right around the corner.

 

[JimR]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I'm not panicing by any means, but bird flu is something to be concerned about.

The last major flu pandemic was "Spanish Flu" in 1918, 20 - 40 million people died worldwide.
)</font>


Maybe this is what the world really needs. Just imagine wiping out a few billion people off the face of the earth. Less fuel would be used. There would be fewer pollutants being released into the atmosphere. Areas decimated by the flu could be turned back into woodlands. Fresh water would be more abundant. There would be less trash and sewer being pumped into our oceans contaminating the fish. The air would be cleaner due to less vehicles being driven.

 

[JimR]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">( and we can safely store the by products, )</font>

How can one possibly say this, knowing those by-products can remain a hazard for 100,000 + years?

Nuclear energy has its place, but the cost to future generations is an unknown and should not be taken lightly.

-Mike Z. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif )</font>

Maybe it would be easier to ship all this nuclear waste at the sun to burn up rather than keep it here on earth.

 

[cp1969]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Charles,
No offence, but I'm more inclined to accept John's EPA references over SEP(???) as they seem to be one of the groups Mike was refering to with an agenda. )</font>

That's fine. The only thing I'm trying to point out is that there is is NOT universal agreement in the scientific community over the effect of CFCs on ozone. The important thing is that you do your own research and reach your own conclusion rather than relying on an internet post that either flat-out states or implies that all scientists agree on a particular subject. The dissenters tend to get drowned out by whatever is politically correct at the moment (remember "global cooling?" "All science points to it!") and if one thinks the EPA does not have an agenda, my opinion is that further investigation would reveal otherwise.

 

[plumboy]

</font><font color="blueclass=small">( I do not buy the argument that because we can pollute in a micro environment we can do it on a macro level and then jump to the conclusion that we can cause global warming, then jump to the decision we have to fix it. )</font>

Reshaping the landsape by taking down the forest and paving over them plays a little part also.We cant fix it,disease,instinctive abstinence and extreme weather is the only solution IMO.The question is just how bad IT is.The climate as we know it has come to be through 100's of million years,in those years it has never seen an impact of an organism like us.Dinosaurs?They were plentiful enough to leave fossils but they stopped being for some reason-climate change.I dont think we will see an ice age by any means but we are in store for some changes in the years to come unless technology takes us to the next level,but if science fails then my guess is poverty and disease will prevail and change society,kinda put us back in place on the food chain we've left. <font color="black"> </font>

 

[AKfish]

WHOOOEEEE!!! This has darn near been as much fun as a bar fight on the 4th of July!
And as my dear ol' mom used to say --- don't squeal till you been hurt...
Whose hurtin' by the changes that are comin'? Anybody here can't fill his tractor up? Likely not fill the tank up next year? Gonna be a big deal if you fill up with 10-25% soybean, palm, canola oil biodiesel mix?
Is there more oil in the US or less? Think we should be lookin' around at what the long-term options might be? Think there might be more than a few OPPORTUNITIES with those options?
How about we line up our sons and daughter's to get on down to Venezula (sp?) and get that Chavez nut-ball in shape so he won't turn the spigot off (I think they're No. 2 behind the Saudi's in oil exported to the US) the next time we have some supply disruption in the world? Or should we re-think our non-existant national energy policy?
Nobody should be holdin' his head and cryin' the sky is fallin'. We can and should be doin' things differently in this country. We can make a differnce in the world by getting our house in order.
There's 2 brand new 10 MGWatt wind generators on the Missouri river bluff's near my folk's house in SD. They're tied into the Hydroelectric grid that sends power to Denver and Minneapolis.
WHAAA, WHAAA, WHAAA!!! Gut check, people. Suck it up and let's get moving! AKfish

 

[beenthere]

I'm with Mike too.

The 'statistics' can be twisted per what one wants to 'tell'.

The "scientists' publish to get more funding for their work and their career. Must take much of their 'ilk' with a grain of salt, as it is unfortunate that they are quite biased and usually have a great 'conflict' of interest. I know, as I was one of them and sometimes it wasn't pretty what one would do to 'sell' the research and get it funded.

Just think, 10,000 years ago Wisconsin was under ice. Guess its been warming up since then. I don't think its something new, nor will we 'change' it no matter what we do, (even if we suddenly quit burning ANY oil this very minute). Volcanoes, fires, you name it will continue whether we are here or not. And I don't get any funding for saying that. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[plumboy]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Whose hurtin' by the changes that are comin'? Anybody here can't fill his tractor up? Likely not fill the tank up next year? Gonna be a big deal if you fill up with 10-25% soybean, palm, canola oil biodiesel mix?
)</font>
I would think the people hurt short term are the ones who cant pay thier bills with the skyrocketting enregy costs and the employers who cant increase their wages to make up for it.I like the thought of bio in the years to come but we dont really have the idle farmland sitting around to make a dent,plus the droughts and floods due to the eratic weather we are in store for... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif(Sorry couldnt resist)Anyways it never hurts to keep food stockpiled for your thundersticks. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif