This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Two Moons on 11 November 2012 - 18:11
This caught my eye today, thought I'd share incase some didn't see it themselves.
Moons.
Moons.
by vonissk on 11 November 2012 - 23:11
Hay Moons Hope you are having a good evening. Thanks for posting that--I didn't catch it first time around. I agree with it and I have been saying all along that all the junk we emit into the air has to do with the changes in the weather. I see it changing down here. Me and Joanoro were just talking about not long ago. The hot is hotter here and the cold is colder and coming quicker. we have already had 2 snows in northern Oklahoma and 3 hard freezes here in the southern part and that all happened last month. The first hard freeze was about the first of October and I can never remember it being that cold that early. Definately something we should be thinking about.
by Two Moons on 12 November 2012 - 01:11
We too had freezes and today almost hit 70, I am amazed to see moths and mosquitoes still.
Now more cold is coming this next week.
Now more cold is coming this next week.
by vonissk on 12 November 2012 - 04:11
Yeah my friend lives in southern WI and she said it was in the 60's there. It was here too but it rained so it was a cold 60. But just like last night it was almost 70 and I had to turn the fan on and now its down to 38. It really is strange. And I believe that one guy on there that it is going to get stranger.
Not to go way off topic and start beating a dead horse but like you guys were talking about the coal industry. I don't think that anybody wants to shut anything down, I think the objective is to just make it not so nasty.
When we went to CO last month and we went around Denver--we went to a subburb called Windsor which was where our hotel was and the show site was just about 4 miles from there. Anyway I was so excited to see the mountains and it was so smoggy you could barely tell them. The next day it rained and when we left the next monring you could see them real clear like you do in the books and on tv. That guy was talking about 30 40 or maybe 50 more years and we'll all be downhill. And it's really sad.............
Not to go way off topic and start beating a dead horse but like you guys were talking about the coal industry. I don't think that anybody wants to shut anything down, I think the objective is to just make it not so nasty.
When we went to CO last month and we went around Denver--we went to a subburb called Windsor which was where our hotel was and the show site was just about 4 miles from there. Anyway I was so excited to see the mountains and it was so smoggy you could barely tell them. The next day it rained and when we left the next monring you could see them real clear like you do in the books and on tv. That guy was talking about 30 40 or maybe 50 more years and we'll all be downhill. And it's really sad.............
by Micaho on 19 November 2012 - 02:11
I was listening to Bill Moyers program on climate change tonight and I have a lot of questions.
I believe that the climate is constantly changing, but I don't believe it is caused by humans mostly because Mars is also heating up and is not affected by pollution on Earth. I thought in the past cyclical heating and cooling was believed due to the existence or absence of sun spots or some other kind of solar phenomenon.
However, improvements to air quality and the environment are clearly desirable under any circumstances. I would like to reduce noxious emissions from manufacturing so that the air is cleaner, there are fewer respiratory diseases, no acid rain,, etc. But based on this "meatless Mondays" initiative in California, it seems the worst air quality violators are livestock breeders, not manufacturing plants. So why would the administration be so set on "Cap and Trade" policies for manufacturers?.
Excessive EPA regulations on manufacturers would further impede our country's ability to compete globally against major violators of air quality standards such as China, Russia and India. I would hope greener manufacturing processes could be introduced without increased fines and taxation by some incentive system. We have to balance the actual value of any actions (cleaner air but not temperature regulation) against the possible consequences to our economy.
I assume a lot of people would disagree with my opinion and I would be interested in hearing your arguments.
I believe that the climate is constantly changing, but I don't believe it is caused by humans mostly because Mars is also heating up and is not affected by pollution on Earth. I thought in the past cyclical heating and cooling was believed due to the existence or absence of sun spots or some other kind of solar phenomenon.
However, improvements to air quality and the environment are clearly desirable under any circumstances. I would like to reduce noxious emissions from manufacturing so that the air is cleaner, there are fewer respiratory diseases, no acid rain,, etc. But based on this "meatless Mondays" initiative in California, it seems the worst air quality violators are livestock breeders, not manufacturing plants. So why would the administration be so set on "Cap and Trade" policies for manufacturers?.
Excessive EPA regulations on manufacturers would further impede our country's ability to compete globally against major violators of air quality standards such as China, Russia and India. I would hope greener manufacturing processes could be introduced without increased fines and taxation by some incentive system. We have to balance the actual value of any actions (cleaner air but not temperature regulation) against the possible consequences to our economy.
I assume a lot of people would disagree with my opinion and I would be interested in hearing your arguments.
by leeshideaway on 19 November 2012 - 03:11
I believe that it is just another fear tactic for the gov to collect more money and regulate. (not necessarily that climate change does not exist)
No one is talking about solutions - just collecting money.
If I own acres of trees that convert more carbon into oxygen than any carbon I use, should I get a credit?
It won't be a two way street and doesn't seem to be about solutions.
So people with money will still be changing the climate and poor people won't be able to afford heat, gasoline, and electricity.
No one is talking about solutions - just collecting money.
If I own acres of trees that convert more carbon into oxygen than any carbon I use, should I get a credit?
It won't be a two way street and doesn't seem to be about solutions.
So people with money will still be changing the climate and poor people won't be able to afford heat, gasoline, and electricity.
by Two Moons on 19 November 2012 - 04:11
Climate change is natural, and normally nature rebounds, man has changed that balance.
Yes you can get credits Lees.
Governments can't fix anything because money must be made, the fix is something no one is capable of doing because they could not survive the changes needed to make it right.
We have polluted the air and oceans, polluted ground water, released dangerous elements into our environment, over populated, deforested replacing trees with concrete which also heats up our atmosphere, replaced natural fauna with mono crops and genetically engineered plants without any concern for what may come back on us years down the road, taxed every resource to the breaking point destroying eco systems, over fishing the oceans till species become extinct, slash and burn, strip mining, I could go on forever and not cover all the impact man has on the planet.
Humans are the problem period.
Nature will do it, bring change itself, by simply evolving after all of us are gone.
And sooner or later we will be gone, by our own hand.
The Earth will remain, rebound, evolve, and continue on.
Moons.
Yes you can get credits Lees.
Governments can't fix anything because money must be made, the fix is something no one is capable of doing because they could not survive the changes needed to make it right.
We have polluted the air and oceans, polluted ground water, released dangerous elements into our environment, over populated, deforested replacing trees with concrete which also heats up our atmosphere, replaced natural fauna with mono crops and genetically engineered plants without any concern for what may come back on us years down the road, taxed every resource to the breaking point destroying eco systems, over fishing the oceans till species become extinct, slash and burn, strip mining, I could go on forever and not cover all the impact man has on the planet.
Humans are the problem period.
Nature will do it, bring change itself, by simply evolving after all of us are gone.
And sooner or later we will be gone, by our own hand.
The Earth will remain, rebound, evolve, and continue on.
Moons.
by Preston on 19 November 2012 - 06:11
Moons, the first remedy is to stop "operation Cloverleaf", the USG secret program to dump thousands of tons of nanoparticles of aluminum and barium salts into the skies. This can potentially cause a greenhouse effect itself, harms plant and tree growth, screws up the weather and contributes to cognitive slippage (aka "senior moments") and early Alzheimers or dementia.
And stop firing off the ten part international HAARP systems which can create holes in the ozone. Use of these ultra high powered systems which heat up the atmosphere do immense damage. It's time this is exposed and stopped.
Plants need carbon, the greenest areas in my state are along the freeways where carbon is emitted from gas pipes of cars and trucks.
The experts appearing in the movie are good folks but do not have the full picture of HAARP and Operation Cloverleaf.
And stop firing off the ten part international HAARP systems which can create holes in the ozone. Use of these ultra high powered systems which heat up the atmosphere do immense damage. It's time this is exposed and stopped.
Plants need carbon, the greenest areas in my state are along the freeways where carbon is emitted from gas pipes of cars and trucks.
The experts appearing in the movie are good folks but do not have the full picture of HAARP and Operation Cloverleaf.
by Blitzen on 19 November 2012 - 13:11
Ask the Koch Brothers what they think of global warming.
by BabyEagle4U on 19 November 2012 - 15:11
* "But based on this "meatless Mondays" initiative in California, it seems the worst air quality violators are livestock breeders, not manufacturing plants." *
WHAT !!! That's is just crazy. Breeding or even humans eating beef doesn't produce Methane gas. Cows eating vegetation/grass produces Methane gas. ALL ruminants produce Methane gas !! FYI.
Yes, Methane cow patties. In other words FUEL !!! You can take a dry cow patty and start a fire by way of spark with it. You know those fire starter logs city people buy because they can't start a fire ? Yes, those are NOTHING more than compressed cow patties !!!! Methane. People around the world including America STILL use cow patties to heat homes etc. The remains of a burned cow patties is friggin peat moss !!!! LMAO
Eating or breeding beef or cows has NOTHING to do with green house gas other than what's used to cook the meat. This is a hit on Farmers yet again !!!
This isn't about breeding or even eating meat although the vegans are leading the way prolly - it's about the oil companies discouraging natural gas and lobbyists who defend BIG OIL !!! Natural gas doesn't just spring outta the ground ... ALL ruminants produce natural gas and the Earth stores it for later use below the surface like a gas tank !!!! Every dairy or beef farmer you see as you drive by their land, underneath that "private property" land is a natural gas tank !!!! And the farmers who recycle the cow patties as fertilizer year after year are sitting on a massive natural gas tank !!!
Unbelievable.
WHAT !!! That's is just crazy. Breeding or even humans eating beef doesn't produce Methane gas. Cows eating vegetation/grass produces Methane gas. ALL ruminants produce Methane gas !! FYI.
Yes, Methane cow patties. In other words FUEL !!! You can take a dry cow patty and start a fire by way of spark with it. You know those fire starter logs city people buy because they can't start a fire ? Yes, those are NOTHING more than compressed cow patties !!!! Methane. People around the world including America STILL use cow patties to heat homes etc. The remains of a burned cow patties is friggin peat moss !!!! LMAO
Eating or breeding beef or cows has NOTHING to do with green house gas other than what's used to cook the meat. This is a hit on Farmers yet again !!!
This isn't about breeding or even eating meat although the vegans are leading the way prolly - it's about the oil companies discouraging natural gas and lobbyists who defend BIG OIL !!! Natural gas doesn't just spring outta the ground ... ALL ruminants produce natural gas and the Earth stores it for later use below the surface like a gas tank !!!! Every dairy or beef farmer you see as you drive by their land, underneath that "private property" land is a natural gas tank !!!! And the farmers who recycle the cow patties as fertilizer year after year are sitting on a massive natural gas tank !!!
Unbelievable.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top