I thimk those environmentaly safe light bulbs ....Suck
I thought the earth was flat and the sun was spinning around us like all the other celestial bodies in the heavens and the sun was just getting closer due to our strong gravitational pull on it.
I'm no climatologist, but I tend to defer to their more learned opinion in matters concerning their specialty. I've heard compelling arguments on both sides (as far as the science goes, which is, make no mistake, what we should be paying attention to). I don't think the huge majority of climatologist who have and are studying climate change have some crazy left wing agenda, though it's possible some might.
But apart from those issues, here are my thoughts on man-caused global warming: there have been, are, and always will be HUGE natural production of greenhouse gases. That said, I find a little ignorant and foolish to say that all the pollution we've pumped into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution (of which the majority of which was in a time of no environmental regulations) isn't having an impact on the climate today. Greenhouse gas impacting atmospheres, whether it be Earth's, Venus', or Mars', is hard science; there's no debate as to the effects of high greenhouse gas levels in a planet's atmospheres. But did you know that the Earth is simultaneously being cooled via global dimming? Global dimming is a phenomenon thought to result from (mostly) manmade particulates in the atmosphere decrease the amount of sunlight that reaches the surface, thereby reducing the temperature gradually.
There are a lot of things going on with the climate, but its obvious that 1) greenhouse gases make planets hotter, 2) soot makes planets cooler, 3) there is strong evidence that we're affecting the climate, either way, up or down, 4) up or down, there are plenty of people who want to make some personal gain from the scared masses, 5) there's nothing socialist or evil or leftist about wanting to decrease pollution, as long as it's not, you know, some sort of socialist power grab (I think we all know which one that is), and 6) Amanda Seyfried is hotter than any damned global warming.
But apart from those issues, here are my thoughts on man-caused global warming: there have been, are, and always will be HUGE natural production of greenhouse gases. That said, I find a little ignorant and foolish to say that all the pollution we've pumped into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution (of which the majority of which was in a time of no environmental regulations) isn't having an impact on the climate today. Greenhouse gas impacting atmospheres, whether it be Earth's, Venus', or Mars', is hard science; there's no debate as to the effects of high greenhouse gas levels in a planet's atmospheres. But did you know that the Earth is simultaneously being cooled via global dimming? Global dimming is a phenomenon thought to result from (mostly) manmade particulates in the atmosphere decrease the amount of sunlight that reaches the surface, thereby reducing the temperature gradually.
There are a lot of things going on with the climate, but its obvious that 1) greenhouse gases make planets hotter, 2) soot makes planets cooler, 3) there is strong evidence that we're affecting the climate, either way, up or down, 4) up or down, there are plenty of people who want to make some personal gain from the scared masses, 5) there's nothing socialist or evil or leftist about wanting to decrease pollution, as long as it's not, you know, some sort of socialist power grab (I think we all know which one that is), and 6) Amanda Seyfried is hotter than any damned global warming.
Fair enough, i'm not going to even try to spell it out. It requires more thought and personal research than faux/msn/CNN news can offer besides vicious name calling. There are those who read and comprehend the data, and agree with it... And also those who read and comprehend the same data and disagree with it. There's no one right side of the argument from a personal belief standpoint. While the (bulk of the) data makes a lot of sense to me, while a smaller amount of data doesn't. This has always seemed to be a topic that's argued based on which data each has seen. But therein lies the beautiful thing about science... It's true whether people believe in it or not.
I didn't read your post. It was too long to hold my attention this morning. You may be right or wrong. But I thought the picture deserved another shot.
Lets see here, freons were destroying the ozone layer. Amazing this happened at absolutely three years before DuPont,s would wide patent for Freon12 and Freon15 were set to expire. DuPont got a royalty for every pound of freon produced worldwide, but that was about to end. Solution, ban 12 and 15, and replace it with something better that will not destroy us all. Guess what chemical company came up with the only acceptable solutions for the problem with a new 40-50 year world wide patent. Yep, DuPont. Surprise.
Now, let's fine the people on the land who are making the ozone that would float to fill he hole. Government can make a profit on both ends of the fiasco while looking like good guys holding the middle and protecting both ends from doom.
In most cases, FOLLOW THE MONEY. The LA Bason was filled with smog in the 1800's before man destroyed the environment there. The smog was supposed to move when man moved in? FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Supposedly we have to change our light bulbs because we are dependent on foreign oil and the price of oil is too high? How much electricity is produced by oil? Virtually None. $.50 light bulbs do not produce a lot of sales tax. FOLLOW THE MONEY.
When did it become acceptable and proper to flat out lie to people and it is OK? If you call them on it, they become offended and start talking about something non-related that is supposed to be someone elses fault and then the conversation is over.
Now, let's fine the people on the land who are making the ozone that would float to fill he hole. Government can make a profit on both ends of the fiasco while looking like good guys holding the middle and protecting both ends from doom.
In most cases, FOLLOW THE MONEY. The LA Bason was filled with smog in the 1800's before man destroyed the environment there. The smog was supposed to move when man moved in? FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Supposedly we have to change our light bulbs because we are dependent on foreign oil and the price of oil is too high? How much electricity is produced by oil? Virtually None. $.50 light bulbs do not produce a lot of sales tax. FOLLOW THE MONEY.
When did it become acceptable and proper to flat out lie to people and it is OK? If you call them on it, they become offended and start talking about something non-related that is supposed to be someone elses fault and then the conversation is over.
All I know is them fancy light bulbs drop my electric payments... Well, plus I haven't had to change one in eleven years...
Should be a choice, not a mandate.
O noes, you din'dt! Stand by to be FLAYMED!!!!!
It's too warm in the village for the children's, you mean-spirited freedom guy!
I, however, agree. This story has changed several times in my lifetime, and crap REALLY was polluted in the '70s.
Similar threads
