40 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
gravity (a natural occurrence on this planet) causes something to be pulled out of the sky and brought to earth? Does that mean that the sun itself is responsible for the 'warming' of the earth that is being blamed on man in order for MAN to make money on that also natural occurrence? LOL
You're on to something. Now,
we need a study to find out if the sun is red or blue.
I think it's rainbow colored
The stuff that we burn that's causing all the commotion
is little more than stored solar energy anyway. We hear that it took many thousands of years to create earth's giant "battery" and now we hear about harnessing solar energy as a replacement for stored solar energy. Do any of these genius politicians understand what that means as far as how much can be produced? Don't they understand that to make light from solar energy they must darken something?
That stuff we burn
We burn it, it gives off CO2 doesn't it?
Anyone who thinks that all the........
.......crud we've belched into the atmosphere every single day for decades is having no effect on it has their head firmly planted where that red/blue sun doesn't shine.
You seem to forget...
On top of all other natural occurrences that make "global warming" possible, man adds to it. It's not that it hasn't happen before it just may happen during mankind presence. Should more volcanoes erupt, a small meteor hit and start fire or continued forest fires and Amazon tree clearing continue it all reaches a tipping point where "mankind's added input" finally makes it happen. Should the great CO2 locked in the earth ocean crust decide to release from a great earthquake(it has happened) become free, look out. Should Mother Nature decide it's time to start global warming and/or show it's really happening, its already too late. The effect that actually brings it on needn't be a drastic change but a minor one that gradually increase which it appears to be doing. Once it reaches a "tipping point", there rarely nothing that man can but stop and that's not going to happen.
A clear example of this is when electrical power was lost in the NE and NE-east coast a few yrs. ago. Satellite pictures shown that immediately the skies cleared-up. there was always a presence of mankind footprint if you will until power was lost. All those industries and cities couldn't output the global warming effect at least at levels that could be sustained, manually. Only something as drastic as that could be effective at least in the short term to show some reduction but that is asking alot. This is clearly a case of politics and power to help mankind proceed at continued levels and only some natural event will reduce that or provide the clear indication not to do things as before. The best example of that is to reduce from cars its negative emissions. China ia clearly showing that once autos in greater numbers got into use, the side-effect is smog and bad air if for the lack of anything else. -----Willy
I didn't forget
That's exactly what I was saying.
remember how after 9-11 attack
just a few hours after all the flights were grounded, the astronomers had a field day. The night air was so much clearer than it ever was since commercial flight became common place.
Yes it does, and so do we
but where did the ability to produce CO2 come from? Where were the elements prior to becoming coal and petroleum? Wait a minute...my stupid botany classes said that green plants need CO2 to produce sugars...which is food for animals. Mom nature lets nothing go to waste and is very skilled and deliberate in her methods of management. Man has no ability to do better, IMO.
Nature provides raw materials for nuclear weapons too
it's what use we make of things as well as where they come from.
Tangent, sorry, but animal flatulence is a greater danger
than anything else. I remember in the early 70s Harper's had a front and back section on yellow coarse paper which contained article squibs and odd facts, and which pointed out that all the sheep in New Zealand gave off XYZ metric tonnes of Methane each year. A much worse Greenhouse gas than CO2.
(It also had a short entry which read. "In 1900 there were ?0 thousand horses in New York city each producing 10+ pounds of manure daily, It has been estimated that in one year, had it been left to accumulate, it would have filled all the city streets to a depth of 12 feet." or something like that.)
The only reason that there is a push on to limit human caused contributions to the situation is that that is the only variable in the equation that can actually be controlled. We can't stop swamps from decomposing and releasing methane, and we can't stop animals, even livestock from farting, or volcanoes from erupting, or other things like that, but we can limit automobile pollution (but not it's CO and CO2 emissions) and the emissions of dirty generating stations by replacing them with cleaner more efficient ones and eliminating coal which is not just CO2 rich but is also filled with other noxious gasses. Britain in the 1950's eliminated coal fires in peoples houses after a killer smog in London left thousands dead in one incident. Natural gas produces more energy per tonne than coal does or than petroleum does, with none of the extraneous pollutants like Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen oxides and other gasses. Just because Coal is considered to be cheap because it is measure only in the cost of recovery from the ground, and not in damage to the environment, doesn't mean that it isn't, in the larger accounting, more expensive.
Truthfully, I think that the rise in CO2 is probably more related to the elimination of large trees world-wide than it is related to actual emissions. Since the 18th Century we have clear cut most of North and South America and that continues to happen in Africa and South East Asia. If you haven't got what are effectively trillions of CO2 fixing towers world wide, you're not going to have the earth's normal natural ability to reduce CO2 as an environmental factor.
Politicians have learned marketing tactics
like the type used by "The Music Man" but with an added twist. First, you create the perception of a coming disaster. At that same time, you have your solution ready to present. The added twist is that you get more mileage if you accuse your rival of either causing the problem or not recognizing its existence.
I love my trees here...
It was said in the 18 century or maybe earlier that a squirrel could travel by tree limb all the way across North America w/o touching the ground. That certainly isn't the case now. But, one of 1st products exported out of the colonies was timber and pitch, something is short supply in the old countries. England(UK) practically denuded itself for firewood and building materials, etc. and one reason coal was used in such great amounts when it was found to include peat. In fact areas around the Sahara in Africa have increased "desertification": because trees are removed for firewood. Of course dung is re-used for firewood and benzene is expensive or any other fuel. On reason they use solar power when they can or have access to it. -----Willy
The late Bruce Catton, of Civil War fame, grew up in MI.
He wrote a book about his childhood and how all those trees are gone. My Dad lived in Port Huron for a while and part of their [proud] history is the Black River bank-to-bank with logs.
Actually we could do a small bit regarding animal methane
since the same grain that provides meat for one meal would provide several meals if we ate more vegetative meals and smaller meat portions.
Yes, that wonderful gas
which helps warm the earth and the cockles of our hearts.
Not to worry, guys. It will be seen to.
"But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time for the dead to be judged, and to give [their] reward to your slaves the prophets and to the holy ones and to those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth." Rev 11:18, jw.org
And then God
obliterates it all again, like the days of Noah, except solar flare or some other means of burning the earth with intense fires, then comes the new earth.
Why? It isn't the planet he's mad at.
The world was destroyed in Noah's day, but here we stand on it.
Not to mention Isa 48:15.
destroy the earth
And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
He wasn't mad with the earth then either.
The destruction of the earth spoken of is the great war that is going on at the time Christ return.
Gen 6:13: So God said to Noah, "I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.
Yet v.17: I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. ("ON earth")
(Virtually the same in KJV, NIV, NWT)
And, 7:21 ff. agree that only living things were destroyed. Again, Jehovah was angry with the people, not the planet.
All the way to Revelation, where we find that the destruction will happen again: And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!
If you find vermin in your home, do you call the exterminator or burn down the house?
Collateral question: How many arks did Noah build?
More: when you read about other destructions—Sodom, Jericho, Jerusalem itself—do you find a common pattern in the accounts.?
As to the "great war".
The one I find in the Bible is at Rev. 16:14,16.
"They are, in fact, expressions inspired by* demons and perform signs, and they go forth to the kings of the entire inhabited earth,*+ to gather them together to the war+ of the great day+ of God the Almighty... And they gathered them together to the place* that is called in Hebrew HarMagedon.*"
Jehovah vs. all the governors of the earth. (Cf. Dan 2:44) People, not planet.
no need to try to help matters, que sera sera
so the quality of our life has nothing to do with responsibility for our actions
It's like school
Do what you need to get a passing grade, or not and get a failing grade.
Maybe you could fool your teacher but
there is one that you cannot scam. A person cannot be frightened into heaven nor scared away from hell. That ain't how it's gonna' work.
heaven and hell is a perfect example of the
carrot and stick it seems to me.
Follow these rule and you'll be in paradise, break then and you'll burn forever in torment.
Not sure about being frightened into heaven, but it seems there is a deliberate attempt to install fear of hell.
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 2)