Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 11, 2017 10:46:06 GMT -5
Is Summer Arctic ice gone now? frankly, this seems like a bunch of people on a boat with a slow leak. 5 people are working shifts bailing the water out, and one person is smoking a cigarette refusing to help saying "you said we'd sink an hour ago" .
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 11, 2017 11:41:56 GMT -5
Is Summer Arctic ice gone now? frankly, this seems like a bunch of people on a boat with a slow leak. 5 people are working shifts bailing the water out, and one person is smoking a cigarette refusing to help saying "you said we'd sink an hour ago" . LOL,
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 4:40:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2017 11:52:54 GMT -5
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 11, 2017 14:14:20 GMT -5
The faces of climate change: How a rapidly warming Arctic is destroying a way of life There is no shortage of alarming climate change stories. We hear about the rapid rate of Arctic sea ice loss; about abnormally high temperatures in the Far North; polar bears resorting to eating birds' eggs instead of meat to survive. What's often absent in these stories is the faces of those most affected. People have been living in the challenging climate of the North for what some estimate to be 20,000 years. It is their home. It is their way of life. But their home is changing, and they are racing to change with it. www.cbc.ca/news/technology/faces-of-north-climate-change-1.4120055Nothing to see here, folks! Move along! Climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 11, 2017 20:03:35 GMT -5
The faces of climate change: How a rapidly warming Arctic is destroying a way of life There is no shortage of alarming climate change stories. We hear about the rapid rate of Arctic sea ice loss; about abnormally high temperatures in the Far North; polar bears resorting to eating birds' eggs instead of meat to survive. What's often absent in these stories is the faces of those most affected. People have been living in the challenging climate of the North for what some estimate to be 20,000 years. It is their home. It is their way of life. But their home is changing, and they are racing to change with it. www.cbc.ca/news/technology/faces-of-north-climate-change-1.4120055Nothing to see here, folks! Move along! Climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese. I click on the link, looked at the ice rink, They must really do things slow there cause there was funding to improve that rink like four years ago! www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674three_nunavut_communities_in_line_for_arena_upgrades/ Here one thing that was interesting! www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/ads/Marketplace.pdf Remind me not to complain about my grocery costs!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 11, 2017 21:38:14 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,352
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 12, 2017 10:49:17 GMT -5
Our lobster catch is still at record highs- year after year. However scientists have noticed one strange and alarming trend- very few small lobster larvae. They are producing copious amounts of eggs- the sampling of newly hatched baby lobsters bear that out. However when they get to the next phase in their development they seem to - disappear. No one knows why. However the results have been replicated by numerous different scientific samplings, from The College of the Atlantic to government data. It could be that they are moving to different feeding grounds, and are escaping the sampling. It could be new predators that have moved into the region. It could be a die off. It could be something else. They just don't know. It is a touchy subject. No one wants to overly regulate the catch, and it wouldn't do any good anyway. They lobsters are producing eggs, and young are hatching. At this point everyone is just trying to figure out what the heck is going on. It is alarming, because this iconic resource is not only our largest fishery, but it also greatly impacts tourism, which is a major "industry" for our state. The two employ far more people than the national total of 50,000 coal miners. Possibly into deeper, colder waters?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 12, 2017 11:32:31 GMT -5
Meanwhile, on the other side of the planet, the Great Barrier Reef is cooking and dying. Coral bleaching is a stress response that happens when an increase in sea temperatures causes the expulsion of algae that grow inside coral, turning the reefs white and eliminating their main energy source. It's directly linked to global warming. www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/asia/great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching/index.html
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 4:40:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2017 12:59:08 GMT -5
Meanwhile, on the other side of the planet, the Great Barrier Reef is cooking and dying. Coral bleaching is a stress response that happens when an increase in sea temperatures causes the expulsion of algae that grow inside coral, turning the reefs white and eliminating their main energy source. It's directly linked to global warming. www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/asia/great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching/index.htmlThe planet gets warmer. The planet gets cooler. Happens over and over again. What's your point ? That man is going to be able to control this ? (Insert picture of Chicken Little here)
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 12, 2017 13:49:34 GMT -5
Meanwhile, on the other side of the planet, the Great Barrier Reef is cooking and dying. Coral bleaching is a stress response that happens when an increase in sea temperatures causes the expulsion of algae that grow inside coral, turning the reefs white and eliminating their main energy source. It's directly linked to global warming. www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/asia/great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching/index.htmlThe planet gets warmer. The planet gets cooler. Happens over and over again. What's your point ? That man is going to be able to control this ? (Insert picture of Chicken Little here) The US GOP is alone in the world on this opinion. You're in a cult. Funded by the oil industry.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jun 12, 2017 14:48:41 GMT -5
Meanwhile, on the other side of the planet, the Great Barrier Reef is cooking and dying. Coral bleaching is a stress response that happens when an increase in sea temperatures causes the expulsion of algae that grow inside coral, turning the reefs white and eliminating their main energy source. It's directly linked to global warming. www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/asia/great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching/index.htmlThe planet gets warmer. The planet gets cooler. Happens over and over again. What's your point ? That man is going to be able to control this ? (Insert picture of Chicken Little here) I don't think anyone believes man can control the natural warming and cooling of the earth. I do think many believe we can mitigate it somewhat (and, thereby, reduce the damage done) by reducing the effects of our technologies on the atmosphere of our planet. Frankly, this seems logical to me. It certainly can do no harm.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 12, 2017 19:22:24 GMT -5
The planet gets warmer. The planet gets cooler. Happens over and over again. What's your point ? That man is going to be able to control this ? (Insert picture of Chicken Little here) The US GOP is alone in the world on this opinion. You're in a cult. Funded by the oil industry. I thought the oil industry was praised in this thread for backing the Paris Accord. Evidently not.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 12, 2017 20:45:44 GMT -5
The US GOP is alone in the world on this opinion. You're in a cult. Funded by the oil industry. I thought the oil industry was praised in this thread for backing the Paris Accord. Evidently not. the 22 senators that urged trump to withdraw have received millions from the oil industry.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 13, 2017 8:40:04 GMT -5
I thought the oil industry was praised in this thread for backing the Paris Accord. Evidently not. the 22 senators that urged trump to withdraw have received millions from the oil industry. If I was a oil Co. This would be so hard to figure out,,, Do I contribute to someone that wants me to continue to supply a product at a reasonable?? price to the general public? Or do I contribute to some one that wants to over tax, over regulate, because I make pennies on a gallon of fuel!! I will have to flip a coin on that one! I watched a interview with the CEO of Exxon , every three days Exxon produces 1 billion gallons of fuel,,, So where is the "renewable" resource that is going to replace that next week?
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 13, 2017 9:58:29 GMT -5
the 22 senators that urged trump to withdraw have received millions from the oil industry. If I was a oil Co. This would be so hard to figure out,,, Do I contribute to someone that wants me to continue to supply a product at a reasonable?? price to the general public? Or do I contribute to some one that wants to over tax, over regulate, because I make pennies on a gallon of fuel!! I will have to flip a coin on that one! I watched a interview with the CEO of Exxon , every three days Exxon produces 1 billion gallons of fuel,,, So where is the "renewable" resource that is going to replace that next week? You're not an oil company - you're a private citizen. A group of companies is trying to protect their near-monopoly on energy production. An energy methodology that is harmful to the health and welfare of the planet. The companies have bought half your government, to try to silence growing scientific concerns and eliminate protective legislature. Is that so hard to figure out what you should do?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 13, 2017 10:10:29 GMT -5
So what do you want, shut down the oil Co. for a week, see how we do after that?
Or shut them down completely?
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 13, 2017 10:56:48 GMT -5
So what do you want, shut down the oil Co. for a week, see how we do after that? Or shut them down completely? Again - nothing anyone has ever said or suggested. The oil companies are doing quite well financially, they aren't going to disappear overnight. Most people are currently unable to even consider moving to electric cars or solar energy, etc. What we should do is: 1) stay in the paris accord 2) continue to develop renewable energy 3) slowly make progress towards lower emissions We have time. Progress is underway. We don't have to have a global crisis, all we have to do is be smart and take a few steps in the right direction. And then a few more as technology improves prices/efficiency will become more attractive, and then even more people can make smarter choices. The world came together and said - this is important. we can work together and avoid the crisis. Why on earth would the us step back from that? In addition, the side affects are not bad either: cleaner air is needed for health especially for people with asthma, copd, and is associated with lower heart attack rates, bronchitis, ER and hospital admissions. In evaluating the clean air act of 1990, the epa says this: www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/progress-cleaning-air-and-improving-peoples-healthhow much healthy we all would be with cleaner air Study links carbon dioxide emissions to increased deaths: news.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/co-010908.html
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 4:40:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 13:24:36 GMT -5
The planet gets warmer. The planet gets cooler. Happens over and over again. What's your point ? That man is going to be able to control this ? (Insert picture of Chicken Little here) The US GOP is alone in the world on this opinion. You're in a cult. Funded by the oil industry.Playing the audience ? (bolded) I belong to no cults. Unless having a Doctorate in Physics qualifies as one. Your speculative statements just kill me. (bolded)
As an aside, read the sheep part in George Orwell's book "Animal Farm".
Once again, I wish the best of luck to those who think man is going to control the climate.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 4:40:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 13:27:31 GMT -5
The planet gets warmer. The planet gets cooler. Happens over and over again. What's your point ? That man is going to be able to control this ? (Insert picture of Chicken Little here) I don't think anyone believes man can control the natural warming and cooling of the earth. I do think many believe we can mitigate it somewhat (and, thereby, reduce the damage done) by reducing the effects of our technologies on the atmosphere of our planet. Frankly, this seems logical to me. It certainly can do no harm.I know you understand unintended consequences.
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Jun 13, 2017 13:32:57 GMT -5
The US GOP is alone in the world on this opinion. You're in a cult. Funded by the oil industry.Playing the audience ? (bolded) I belong to no cults. Unless having a Doctorate in Physics qualifies as one. Your speculative statements just kill me. (bolded)
As an aside, read the sheep part in George Orwell's book "Animal Farm".
Once again, I wish the best of luck to those who think man is going to control the climate.
Not completely control of course...but how about contribute...as population of world increases. I remember USA population 1950 being at 150 million..today over 325 million...and rest of world increasing as much...enough that China had limits to their families with drastic penalties for those who broke these laws... Possible we of today will only see some problems but definitely our kids...grand kids their kids will be affected...so we today should just pass the buck of doing the right thing down the line...your thinking...? Just wondering....
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,168
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 13, 2017 13:36:06 GMT -5
... Once again, I wish the best of luck to those who think man is going to control the climate. The past couple of summers, I have been stuck behind trucks hauling gravel up the hill to an area that they are building a housing development. I have teased the people doing the development that they are pissing Mother Earth off because she had worked for thousands of years to get those rocks down the hill and they were undoing all that work in a short period of time. Humankind is taking long stored energy out of the ground and releasing it at a rate that nature could never do without that human effort. Slowing that rate doesn't seem like it would be a bad idea.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 13, 2017 13:37:10 GMT -5
The US GOP is alone in the world on this opinion. You're in a cult. Funded by the oil industry.Playing the audience ? (bolded) I belong to no cults. Unless having a Doctorate in Physics qualifies as one. Your speculative statements just kill me. (bolded)
As an aside, read the sheep part in George Orwell's book "Animal Farm".
Once again, I wish the best of luck to those who think man is going to control the climate.
Why change the issue rather than discussing? Control is not the issue, mitigating the effects of pollution is.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 4:40:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 13:37:59 GMT -5
Playing the audience ? (bolded) I belong to no cults. Unless having a Doctorate in Physics qualifies as one. Your speculative statements just kill me. (bolded)
As an aside, read the sheep part in George Orwell's book "Animal Farm".
Once again, I wish the best of luck to those who think man is going to control the climate.
Not completely control of course...but how about contribute...as population of world increases. I remember USA population 1950 being at 150 million..today over 325 million...and rest of world increasing as much...enough that China had limits to their families with drastic penalties for those who broke these laws... Possible we of today will only see some problems but definitely our kids...grand kids their kids will be affected...so we today should just pass the buck of doing the right thing down the line...your thinking...? Just wondering.... I bolded the unproven premise of your question. Until you give me an answer of why it's the "doing the right thing", I have nothing for you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 4:40:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 13:41:12 GMT -5
Playing the audience ? (bolded) I belong to no cults. Unless having a Doctorate in Physics qualifies as one. Your speculative statements just kill me. (bolded)
As an aside, read the sheep part in George Orwell's book "Animal Farm".
Once again, I wish the best of luck to those who think man is going to control the climate.
Why change the issue rather than discussing? Control is not the issue, mitigating the effects of pollution is. Mitigating is just levels of control, making control the issue. "Pollution" is not a cause of global warming. Pollution can be any unwanted activity.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jun 13, 2017 13:47:26 GMT -5
I don't think anyone believes man can control the natural warming and cooling of the earth. I do think many believe we can mitigate it somewhat (and, thereby, reduce the damage done) by reducing the effects of our technologies on the atmosphere of our planet. Frankly, this seems logical to me. It certainly can do no harm.I know you understand unintended consequences. Of course I do. I also see them on both sides of this issue. There will always be unintended consequences when any decision of import is made. Perfection isn't something it pays to expect.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 13, 2017 13:49:18 GMT -5
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jun 13, 2017 13:54:16 GMT -5
Why change the issue rather than discussing? Control is not the issue, mitigating the effects of pollution is. Mitigating is just levels of control, making control the issue. "Pollution" is not a cause of global warming. Pollution can be any unwanted activity. There are a lot of pollutants that enter our atmosphere. Some are man-produced and some are naturally occurring. Some may do damage and some may not. Some are even helpful. I don't think anyone is saying pollution causes global warming. There are many factors involved; some are known, some are suspected, some are natural and some are not.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,257
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 13, 2017 14:42:06 GMT -5
Why change the issue rather than discussing? Control is not the issue, mitigating the effects of pollution is. Mitigating is just levels of control, making control the issue. "Pollution" is not a cause of global warming. Pollution can be any unwanted activity. "Pollution" is not a cause of global warming." Can you support this supposition?
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Jun 13, 2017 15:33:05 GMT -5
Not completely control of course...but how about contribute...as population of world increases. I remember USA population 1950 being at 150 million..today over 325 million...and rest of world increasing as much...enough that China had limits to their families with drastic penalties for those who broke these laws... Possible we of today will only see some problems but definitely our kids...grand kids their kids will be affected...so we today should just pass the buck of doing the right thing down the line...your thinking...? Just wondering.... I bolded the unproven premise of your question. Until you give me an answer of why it's the "doing the right thing", I have nothing for you. I take it you enjoy nit picking. I don't..here we are just two or more average folks expressing our views.. None of our thoughts or feelings are earth shaking..nor are we on the stand giving sworn testimony or for that reason having to prove our statements. Thus my statement in this case of "doing the right thing" is just that...regarding global warming...I grant u that there are many reason for global warming but in my feelings...when we have such a preponderance of professionals who's life work is dedicated to the professional study of these global warming's and the great majority of their beliefs are the same...Human involvement do contribute....I have to believe their ideas are correct. While I agree , to take part in trying to curb human actions in this area may cost some immediate jobs ...the only ones possible benefitting will be those of our decedents or even just theirs..."it is the right thing to do"...in other words do the right thing...From our Donald's actions in rejecting participating in the Paris accords not saying he actually believe there is no human factor that has been proven...more that he cares less about the future warming problems..about problems that his decedents or others in the future or if he does..might face . He is more concerned with the present and today...thus the "doing the right thing " is really not much concern of his or his rabid mob of supporters or a great number of them compared to keeping jobs today.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 13, 2017 20:33:03 GMT -5
So what do you want, shut down the oil Co. for a week, see how we do after that? Or shut them down completely? Again - nothing anyone has ever said or suggested. The oil companies are doing quite well financially, they aren't going to disappear overnight. Most people are currently unable to even consider moving to electric cars or solar energy, etc. What we should do is: 1) stay in the paris accord 2) continue to develop renewable energy 3) slowly make progress towards lower emissions We have time. Progress is underway. We don't have to have a global crisis, all we have to do is be smart and take a few steps in the right direction. And then a few more as technology improves prices/efficiency will become more attractive, and then even more people can make smarter choices. The world came together and said - this is important. we can work together and avoid the crisis. Why on earth would the us step back from that? In addition, the side affects are not bad either: cleaner air is needed for health especially for people with asthma, copd, and is associated with lower heart attack rates, bronchitis, ER and hospital admissions. In evaluating the clean air act of 1990, the epa says this: www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/progress-cleaning-air-and-improving-peoples-healthhow much healthy we all would be with cleaner air Study links carbon dioxide emissions to increased deaths: news.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/co-010908.htmlBy pulling out will save us Americans $1,900,000,000,000,, As far carbon dioxide goes have we stopped drinking fizzy soda?
|
|