Global warming. Thread started by Joanro. - Page 15

Pedigree Database

 
GSD Admin (admin)

by GSD Admin on 30 November 2018 - 14:11

So, Joan we haven't polluted this earth? Our businesses haven't dumped untold chemicals into our ladfills, lakes and rivers? So, it isn't much of a stretch to think that maybe all the CO2 we have and are releasing is also damaging our planet. To think otherwise with your insistence on business and farmers dumping ghastly pesticides everywhere is quite the little extreme twist of logic on your part. The earth is warming whether you want to believe it or not, whether you want to see it or not, it keeps right on warming. I have grandchildren who have to live on this planet long after you and I are gone. I would like to think that our generations did the best we could to maintain this planet but I don't think that has happened nor is it happening at this moment. For you and others to deny what science is telling us is absurd at best and at worst it almost makes you and others complicit in this planets desruction.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/magazine/insect-apocalypse.html

 

Small businesses, lol, because there are so many small businesses opening right now. The regulations are there to keep business from doing what they have done the last 150 years. Child labor, unsafe labor, dumping chemicals down storm drains, dumping chemicals in waterways none of these things have ever happened so we have no reason to put regulations on business. Open your eyes because none of us are ever gonna be as smart as you so in your great wisdom only you are going to believe yourself, OPEN YOUR DAMN EYES. LMFAO.


by joanro on 30 November 2018 - 15:11

Dumping pollutants into streams is not climate change. I didn't even mention the land fills and military pollution with nuke bom b tests in to ocean and on land. So try not putting words in my mouth.

I have my opinion, which last I checked is still allowed, and you have your opinion...just stop putting words in my mouth...

by joanro on 30 November 2018 - 15:11

As for air pollution...I was in LA in late 80's and the air was so polluted visability was less than quarter mile...now it's tremendously improved.

But go look what Beijing and Mumbai have....pollution is worse than LA ever was. So how about you go harrass the people who live in those cities for polluting the air.

Plus, look at the pollution from the fires in Northern Cal...visable from space. And look at the pollution from all the volcanoes when they erupt..worse than any pollution from human activity.

I'll know you care about pollution when you stop riding any mode of transportation built in a factory.
Until that time, I think you just like to insult those who don't follow lockstep with the globalist elitists' dictates.

GSD Admin (admin)

by GSD Admin on 30 November 2018 - 15:11

I have insulted you? I love how you can throw insults around but always whine when someone does it back to you. And your insults always are to the core, yet mine are making a funny out of how smart YOU think you are and you are whining. WOW, want some cheese to go with that WHINE? Oh because one country pollutes way more, we should all pollute, I get it. What about those countries that are a lot cleaner than ours? And btw, smog is different than CO2 but you are to busy ranting about pesticides, GMOs and how we should allow our businesses to do whatever they want to our country/ people, to see the real issues, open your eyes. Now back to Trump - you have no problem cutting down Obama but you care little about Trump being in bed with any whore, Putin, Kim and the Saudis, funny how that works out for you in your own mind. Trump would sell his daughter if someone offered him enough, Trump cares about his wealth and cares nothing about me, YOU or for that matter anyone else, well unless they somehow enrich his racist ass.


Mountain Lion

by Mountain Lion on 30 November 2018 - 16:11

Now we have a thread on global warming that is about pollution and Trump in bed with any whore. How did that evolve?

Maybe some of the posts here should be moved to the Jackass thread.

There is always hope...I suppose

GSD Admin (admin)

by GSD Admin on 30 November 2018 - 17:11

It happened because Joan was slamming Obama so yes I will move your post to the jackass thread. Funny how you and others can go off topic on any thread but let me post something and here you are slamming me, typical of your type.


Hundmutter

by Hundmutter on 30 November 2018 - 17:11

Joan says:" Hund u missed the whole point, the scam is wealth distribution based on the lie that climate change is being caused basically by the USA."
Wealth distribution ? or re-distribution ? 'The US is the country that would have to caught up the majority of money for the third world in the Paris Accord...' Eh ? Sentence does not even make sense. If America would need to 'caught up' the majority of money to wipe out debts of 3rd world countries, its 'cos it was America advanced the loans to put them in debt to it in the first place. All countries would need to do what they can to mitigate or cancel their own debts, no one asks America to write off British debts for example.

And STILL does not explain why there are thousands of non-US biologists and naturalists out there saying the same things with NO SUCH INCENTIVE. Many of which are NOT blaming ALL climate change (or pollution) on the US and its activities, just saying they have a large part to play in the process. Which given the size of the operation, they do.

Polar Bears:
WWF says: "The total population of approx. 26,000 wild polar bears are divided into 19 units or sub-populations.
Of these, JUST ONE sub-population is increasing (McClintock Channel); 5 are 'stable', and 4 are in decline." (Those 4 including:
Baffin Bay, Beaufort Sea, Kane Basin). WWF also say there are 9 areas of the Arctic (by far the majority of area, of the unpopulated bits, which rely on availability of sea ice) where they do not have sufficient information to publish population figures.

See also: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/starving-polar-bear


by beetree on 30 November 2018 - 17:11

Speaking of Smog. Anyone here watch "The Crown" series? Fascinating show, I thought. Very interesting to learn about another countries' common history. That was the first I'd heard of the Great Smog of London in 1952. It was this event and the ensuing deaths attributed to it that spurred the first environmental legislations to be enacted.

Interestingly enough, similar but not indentical types of pollution activitities combined with specific weather events are what create the chemical reactions responsible for the pollution and haze of the air in Beijing.

Today in the USA, coal burning energy providers are seeking cleaner burning coal supplies from Mongolia compared to what is mined in the USA due to the restrictions placed on them during the Obama era. This might be considered an unintended consequence to the intended goal of building highly efficienct coal gasification technologies that are being embraced by China and India. The idea with the Obama era, tougher restrictions was to force the switch to cleaner power sources while citing these changes will combat global warming.

Still, under the Trump administration, the US exports of the less clean burning coal mined from the US has increased because of its use in steel manufacturing.

From what I've gathered, when considering energy-lending money to some countries, the World Bank has to balance the needs and capability of the emerging countries at their immediate moment, and envision how to enable them to invest in the newer, technogies that will be greener and cleaner in their future. This type of endeavor is a process that involves overlap while the green, renewable energy goal keeps moving forward. Trump wants to lift the restrictions on lending for the developing countries. The alarmist fear is that the loosened funds available will not be cause for investing in the renewable and green energy futures, but instead in the immediate benefit of burning cheaper coal in outdated energy plants, as a short-term winning goal. My guess is the exports for US coal would find another increase and make for happy Trump supporters.

While Al Gore touted carbon capture as a major solution, and rightly so, the highly efficient coal plants are the other part of the equation to efficiency and lower emissions.

I am not sure if they will combat global warming but they do save lives and improve the quality of the air and those most affected with respiratory conditions.

by joanro on 30 November 2018 - 17:11

Hund, try coughed up instead of caught up.
And of course it's re- distribution.


Hundmutter

by Hundmutter on 30 November 2018 - 18:11

Had you really never heard of our "Pea Soupers", Bee ? The changes of The Clean Air Act, with 'coke' being developed instead of coal for domestic fires and commercial use, did not cure London Smog immediately, I can still remember thick yellow fogs on our streets into the '60s while I was growing up. Bronchitis was a very common disease, which these days we hardly ever hear about.

 

@Joan - well would you please use the Edit facillity ? 






 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top