QUOTE: Originally posted by EUCLID TRAVIS Political scientists know that socialism can only expand by hiding its intent. It either has to pretend that it is something that it is not or it must come on so slowly that nobody notices; a mode referred to as creeping socialism. Saving the planet from global warming is the latest mask being used to hide the advancement of world socialism, which is intended to transfer wealth from the richest nations to all other nations. In the deepest terms, it is accurate to say that global warming has nothing to do with climate. Saving the planet is just the sales pitch for the bitter medicine that hides behind the mask. The doctrine that is intended to promulgate this principle is the Kyoto Treaty on climate change. Basically, it divides up the right to emit carbon dioxide and other pollutants equally among all nations, thus permitting the United States no more of this right than a country the size of Cuba for example. The treaty allows these basic assigned pollution credits to be sold to, or purchased by all countries as if the credits were a trading currency. The United States, being a large manufacturing country, produces the greatest amount of pollutants, so it will need to purchase pollution credits from smaller countries that will naturally have an excess of such credits. In this way, the wealth of the United States will be transferred to all of the third world countries. What it boils down to is a world carbon tax administered by the United Nations. The result will be a leveling of the playing field in terms of world wealth. The mechanics of the Kyoto Treaty require the United States to cut its energy consumption by 30% within ten years. Aside from the wealth transfer, the economic result of this energy cutback alone is too staggering to imagine. If the American people were somehow made aware of it, they would reject the Kyoto Treaty on that basis alone, even if they did not see the sinister agenda that lurks behind it. Many Americans think they are clever to see through the motives of Big Oil, which opposes Kyoto for its own economic self-interest. But too many of them are not clever enough to see the main motive behind this smoke screen. All it will take is enough people believing in global warming as it is being sold, and Kyoto or some version of it will happen. The mainstream media is selling global warming every day now as if it were an infomercial. They don't see the agenda behind it. They are just giddy over the p.c., green, save the planet message, which is as deep as they go. The way things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised if Bush and the Republicans in congress suddenly came out and said they were ready to sign Kyoto. Certainly the Democrats will if they get in power. So when it comes to $3.50 per gallon gas, I say enjoy it while it lasts.
QUOTE: Originally posted by bowlerp Dave, Pray tell exactly what are your "common sense" environmental protection proposals? The devil IS in the details and until you can replace our hard won laws with something specific and actionable that continues to work to reduce environmental pollution, you are only full of so much hot air. Do you not think that part of our increasing life span in the United States is attributable to laws that protect us from wanton air and water pollution? If you do not see a direct correlation you are not really looking, you are just spouting so much typical conservative pablum. Try living on the other side for awhile. Travel to Shenzen City China near Hong Kong and live there for 2 weeks. You will experience a distinct difficulty breathing merely walking around outside without being very active. If you are prone to any sort of allergies or lung dysfunction, your long term health and your very life are at risk there. Now imagine the United States reverting to its turn of the 20th Century ways and you have an idea what it is like in China (or Russia). If it appeals to you, you are welcome to go and live there, but don't try to impose your empty approach on the rest of us. If the failures of China and Russia are not teaching you the value of environmental laws, then nothing short of a disaster to where you personally live will ever persuade you. The earth's ecosystem is ultimately tied together as one and when you damage a region, you damage the entire planet. Perhaps you don't give a hoot, but I do, my family does, my region does, and the world should. Physicist Steven Hawking is now so pessimistic about the human species ruining the earth that he believes that mankind will destroy itself unless we colonize space. The problem is, there is no place like home. Akron, Ohio, once home of one of the most polluted cities in the United States, now a pleasant place to live except when someone else's dirty air floats our way.
An "expensive model collector"
QUOTE: Originally posted by n012944 After reading this thread, I thought maybe would should not fire up the Chinese steam locomotives in Iowa.[:o)][:-,] Bert
QUOTE: Originally posted by bowlerp Dave, Pray tell exactly what are your "common sense" environmental protection proposals?
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal [ 4. Give states and localities final say over federal land use decisions. After all, they are the ones who are most impacted by land management decisions. And stewardship begins at home. Let the locals decide how much timber to cut, how much land should be off limits, etc. Forbid out of state entities from interfering in local land use decisions on federal land. Well that's four, I'll let you ponder these before I add more. Reply Edit Hugh Jampton Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Southern Region now, UK 820 posts Posted by Hugh Jampton on Thursday, June 15, 2006 4:00 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb If the polar ice cap melts there are already entrepenures who are negotiating for the shorter shipping routes from Russia to Europe across what they hope will be thru the former North Pole.[%-)] So where's the North Pole going to be when the ice melts then??? Generally a lurker by natureBe AlertThe world needs more lerts.It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 15, 2006 5:38 AM For those who pour scorn on the correlation between the smoke stack and clean air, well one reason why there were a succession of Clean Air Acts in the UK, why Lead was banned as a fuel additive etc etc was due to scientific evidence pinpointing the pollution. The trade off in peoples health and the cost to it, though not measureable immediately may far outwiegh the cost to industry over time. We do not know yet. What was interesting was the creeping march of scientific socialism is that at least one trading bloc has introduced a carbon emissions trading system, which, however imperfect is an attempt to commercialise pollution and therefore incentivise companies to act. Some large majors such as BP do have an internal pollution trading system if memory serves me. The European Union is about to vote on whether to subject airlines to the same system in trading allowances, this will apply to all Airlines, irrespective of nationality if they fly to Europe. So, sorry my American friends, its a coming whether you like it or loath it. Reply Edit bobwilcox Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Crozet, VA 1,049 posts Posted by bobwilcox on Thursday, June 15, 2006 6:03 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well that's four, I'll let you ponder these before I add more. Don't bother. It is a waist of your time and ours. Perphaps an enviromentel site would be interested. Bob Reply zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:09 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Hey!!! You've been watching TLC too!!! And the records in the ice prove this has happened over and over and over again too. In fact all the other times was before industrialization. This is a natural cycle. What's your point. [#dots] My point is that even though these climate fluctuations have been occurring since the formation of our planet, it is only in the last few centuries has man begun to inhabit in huge numbers the areas that are most affected by the climactic variations...hence the need for concern that human activity has tipped the scales of a system that has been functioning for millenia. Of course climate change has been happening for thousands of years. Ice ages come and go. 10,000 years ago Chicago and New York were under 1,000 feet of ice! The glaciers are what carved out the Great Lakes and gave the northern states their beautiful scenery. Who knows, maybe the climate is so sensitive to external fluctuations it will be like a big, heavy train at the top of a hill. Everything is fine as long as the weight on both sides of the hill are equal. But as soon as that train passes the point of no return by just one car length, it will begin its downhill roll. Very slowly at first, barely perceptable. But soon the momentum builds. And as any good engineer knows, once the hill is topped, you have to get the train under control RIGHT NOW, or else it soons becomes impossible and he has a runaway. No one yet knows how sensitive the atmosphere is to human influence. Perhaps, as futuremodal contends, human contribution is the proverbial drop in the bucket. Or perhaps human contribution will be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back. I can't help but wonder if it is worth the risk? Reply sanvtoman Member sinceJanuary 2002 319 posts Posted by sanvtoman on Thursday, June 15, 2006 12:00 PM It can be depressing to listen to all the climate related bad news! I guess the way to look at it is in 100 years we will all be dead anyway.Just hope it gets better for the children. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 15, 2006 12:40 PM There is nothing wrong with cleaning up pollution. The U.S. and other industrialized countries have come a long way over the last century. There was a time when creeks and rivers were seen as handy, natural sewer systems that would carry away all kinds of waste oil, sludge, tailings, and what have you. But there is a larger political agenda that attaches itself to environmentalism. That agenda seeks to level the disparity between the industrialized countries and the third world by taking from the former and giving it to the latter. The advocates of that agenda will tell you that anthropologists have discovered that societies with less material comforts have more contented lives. Thus they see the third world is seen as being authentic while the industrialized nations are seen as greedy. Their solution to the energy crisis is to reduce the material standard of living for the most advanced countries for the benefit of the less advanced countries. There is much to doubt about the science behind the theory of global warming. There is just barely enough data to establi***hat the climate is warming. Beyond that, it is impossible to determine how much warming will occur or what its effect will be. Beyond that, there is no proof that mankind is causing the warming even though it is the underlying assumption that is being used to demand a change in lifestyles in order to remedy the problem. But in the largest view of the theory of global warming, the science is beside the point. Even climate change is beside the point. The point of global warming is political. It is a political agenda, which is empowered by the made up premise that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. Think of that every time you exhale. Reply Edit vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Thursday, June 15, 2006 1:11 PM Wow I'm going to keep my feet out of all the political he said she said going on here and try to stick to the science of the discussion. The point of the PBS "dimming sun" episode was not that the reflection is offsetting global warming, mearly lessening its current effect, however if the increasing amount of CO2 and pollutant particles continues there will be a tipping point where the amount of solar radiation retained by the CO2 will offset the mitigating effects of the reflection and lead to a rapid, RAPID increase in atmospheric temperatures worldwide. If that happens better start seeing what there wearing in Addis Adaba cause it will be getting that hot even in the northern latitudes. Part of the issue isnt whether these are recurring natural phenom or not, its that we've spent the last 5000 years building our major cities hugging the coastlines of the world, a rise is sea levels is going to have tremendous effects on everyone. As to ice cap melting and an apparent "who cares" attitude being displayed, if too much fresh water gets into the gulf stream, it will shut down or get redirected farther south, which could mean northeastern US and Canada will become climaticly more like Siberia and Katchakan penisula. Northern and central Europe will become much colder. If the Antarctic ice sheets go, forget it. We are going to face massive worldwide coastal flooding and mass MASS exodus of populations forced to move to higher ground. Massive relocations of port facilities and industries, refineries, and everything else inside the flood planes and the associated effects of new coastal erosion the wave action and tides of higher seas on areas of land not previously in the surf zone. Most estimates say that 20 feet rise worldwide would be the worst effects, but are we prepared to build 35 foot seawalls over 1000's of miles of coastline near major American cities??? could we afford to? If our governmant is renigging on replacing barriers in New Orleans because of costs, what kind of whining about the cost of multi-billion$ in seawalls over the course of hundreds of miles all over the country are we going to get? This stuff is coming, even George Bush finally agreed Global Warming is REAL, it will have REAL effects on everyone in this country, either directly thru higher sea levels, shifting weather patterns, hotter temps, or indirectly by the cumulative effects on our economy. Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... Have fun with your trains Reply rrandb Member sinceDecember 2001 From: K.C.,MO. 1,063 posts Posted by rrandb on Thursday, June 15, 2006 1:30 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb If the polar ice cap melts there are already entrepenures who are negotiating for the shorter shipping routes from Russia to Europe across what they hope will be thru the former North Pole.[%-)] So where's the North Pole going to be when the ice melts then??? Remember that it will not have to melt completely just enough to keep a shipping channel open with ice breakers thru the winter. The boats have gone thru the bearing sea and around the north pole to Europe in the summer now. Tthese boys want the year round cost savings. The water that melts is fresh and will become part of the thick fresh water bubble already under the ice pact. If it were in direct contact with salt water it would have melted long ago like iceburgs do now. Put 2 ice cubes in 2 glasses of water 1 with salt water and 1 with fresh. See which one melts faster. Antartica is a different story as it has some land under it and a fresh water bubble under the ice. Reply rrandb Member sinceDecember 2001 From: K.C.,MO. 1,063 posts Posted by rrandb on Thursday, June 15, 2006 1:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Hey!!! You've been watching TLC too!!! And the records in the ice prove this has happened over and over and over again too. In fact all the other times was before industrialization. This is a natural cycle. What's your point. [#dots] My point is that even though these climate fluctuations have been occurring since the formation of our planet, it is only in the last few centuries has man begun to inhabit in huge numbers the areas that are most affected by the climactic variations...hence the need for concern that human activity has tipped the scales of a system that has been functioning for millenia. Of course climate change has been happening for thousands of years. Ice ages come and go. 10,000 years ago Chicago and New York were under 1,000 feet of ice! The glaciers are what carved out the Great Lakes and gave the northern states their beautiful scenery. Who knows, maybe the climate is so sensitive to external fluctuations it will be like a big, heavy train at the top of a hill. Everything is fine as long as the weight on both sides of the hill are equal. But as soon as that train passes the point of no return by just one car length, it will begin its downhill roll. Very slowly at first, barely perceptable. But soon the momentum builds. And as any good engineer knows, once the hill is topped, you have to get the train under control RIGHT NOW, or else it soons becomes impossible and he has a runaway. No one yet knows how sensitive the atmosphere is to human influence. Perhaps, as futuremodal contends, human contribution is the proverbial drop in the bucket. Or perhaps human contribution will be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back. I can't help but wonder if it is worth the risk? You have never read the opions of scientist that say we humans are little more than ants on a very big sand lot. Perhaps if we exploded all our nuclears bombs simultaniously we would have a dramatic effect. It still would not be as much as some of the larger volcanic explosions minus the radioactivity.It is a little grandiouse to assume one can influence something which we really do not fully understand. Can scientist explain gravity or even begin to duplicate it. NO. They know we have it and how it works but not why. Are they just now begining to undestand weather patterens. Can you say El Nin'o. They have only been keeping accurate weather records for a little over a hundred years on a plant that is hundreds of millions years old. Seems to me like delusions of grandure. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 15, 2006 1:51 PM How about a different approach? The next time you want to sit down, THINK. How can the steel wheel on steel rail be "in on this": http://www.steelcase.com/na/environmental_think_products.aspx?f=11845&c=17820 http://www.mbdc.com/c2c_home.htm Reply Edit solzrules Member sinceJanuary 2006 From: SE Wisconsin 1,181 posts Posted by solzrules on Thursday, June 15, 2006 6:13 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Wow I'm going to keep my feet out of all the political he said she said going on here and try to stick to the science of the discussion. The point of the PBS "dimming sun" episode was not that the reflection is offsetting global warming, mearly lessening its current effect, however if the increasing amount of CO2 and pollutant particles continues there will be a tipping point where the amount of solar radiation retained by the CO2 will offset the mitigating effects of the reflection and lead to a rapid, RAPID increase in atmospheric temperatures worldwide. If that happens better start seeing what there wearing in Addis Adaba cause it will be getting that hot even in the northern latitudes. Part of the issue isnt whether these are recurring natural phenom or not, its that we've spent the last 5000 years building our major cities hugging the coastlines of the world, a rise is sea levels is going to have tremendous effects on everyone. As to ice cap melting and an apparent "who cares" attitude being displayed, if too much fresh water gets into the gulf stream, it will shut down or get redirected farther south, which could mean northeastern US and Canada will become climaticly more like Siberia and Katchakan penisula. Northern and central Europe will become much colder. If the Antarctic ice sheets go, forget it. We are going to face massive worldwide coastal flooding and mass MASS exodus of populations forced to move to higher ground. Massive relocations of port facilities and industries, refineries, and everything else inside the flood planes and the associated effects of new coastal erosion the wave action and tides of higher seas on areas of land not previously in the surf zone. Most estimates say that 20 feet rise worldwide would be the worst effects, but are we prepared to build 35 foot seawalls over 1000's of miles of coastline near major American cities??? could we afford to? If our governmant is renigging on replacing barriers in New Orleans because of costs, what kind of whining about the cost of multi-billion$ in seawalls over the course of hundreds of miles all over the country are we going to get? This stuff is coming, even George Bush finally agreed Global Warming is REAL, it will have REAL effects on everyone in this country, either directly thru higher sea levels, shifting weather patterns, hotter temps, or indirectly by the cumulative effects on our economy. Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. You think this is bad? Just wait until inflation kicks in..... Reply rrandb Member sinceDecember 2001 From: K.C.,MO. 1,063 posts Posted by rrandb on Thursday, June 15, 2006 6:33 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. Most people agree the most devestating problem in NO was tha depletion of wetlands due to changes on the Mississippi River and ACE flood control. Okay and the walls of the dikes fell over due to (termites?) they were too small? Man does affect his enviroment but mostly at his own parrell not the entire earths. Reply solzrules Member sinceJanuary 2006 From: SE Wisconsin 1,181 posts Posted by solzrules on Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:09 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. Most people agree the most devestating problem in NO was tha depletion of wetlands due to changes on the Mississippi River and ACE flood control. Okay and the walls of the dikes fell over due to (termites?) they were too small? Man does affect his enviroment but mostly at his own parrell not the entire earths. the dikes collapsed because money earmarked by the federal government to the Army Corp of Engineers to maintain and improve the dikes went to maintain casino interests instead. The entire New Orleans basin is sinking because the french built it on a swamp. Like all morons that build on a swamp, sooner or later something has to give. Foundations will fail, water will flood, and no amount of fill will change the water table unless the swamp is drained. Being that the city is sandwiched between two bodies of water and the city proper is below sea level, New Orleans is quite possibly built on the worst location on the earth (maybe except Venice, Italy). I think this is a case of man not thinking before acting, a very common occurence. Some people, in desparate search of a cause to champion, have claimed that the intesity of the hurricane is due to global warming. No facts, no studies, just a claim. The fact is, hurricane Katrina was not the worst on record. If you choose to live in an area prone to hurricanes, you should plan accordingly. Don't look to the Kyoto treaty as a way to control mother nature. That's just a piece of paper. Likewise with us Wisconsinites - although not directly in tornado ally, we get a few of them from time to time. We must prepare for weather, wether good or bad. You think this is bad? Just wait until inflation kicks in..... Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:55 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well that's four, I'll let you ponder these before I add more. Don't bother. It is a waist of your time and ours. Perphaps an enviromentel site would be interested. Well, then don't bother butting in on someone else's inquiry if you are that closed minded. Reply Edit zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Friday, June 16, 2006 7:45 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... Vic, Do you ever get the feeling that we would have better success talking to a wall? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MEMO From: those of us "Chicken Littles" that see that the sky is falling To: those of you that have your heads firmly planted in the sand (or wherever): re: global climate change due to human influence Message: Only time will tell which school of thought was correct. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, June 16, 2006 8:38 AM Either Hewlett or Packard said, when asked whether the garage they started their company in should be made an historic preservation site, that he didn't think it should be. He thought the site should be used by someone else with a better idea for it. As I understand it, the Mississippi River deposited the soil that exists south of Missouri. With something that powerful, maybe we should adapt to it. Let it flow where it's gonna flow, and create new land. I've read that satellite data indicates that at current rates of erosion, NO will be an island in the Gulf before the end of the this century (and that's with no consideration of the effects of any change in atmospheric temperatures). Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, June 16, 2006 10:43 AM The global warming believers say that it would be fooli***o ignore the threat, because if it materializes, it will be too late. They contend that it would only be prudent to assume the threat is real and act accordingly. But I doubt that many people realize just what level of sacrifice is called for as the proper reaction to global warming if you believe in it. Certainly there is no reason to question the global warming science if you don’t realize how much sacrifice it requires. Most people think they can do their part to combat climate change by recycling, keeping their cars tuned up, buying special light bulbs, combining car trips, and saying they care. But those things are tiny compared to the actual fare that will be collected once everybody gets onboard the global warming train with the signing of the Kyoto treaty. This will require a large portion of your income and it won’t be voluntary. The cost will not be apparent until after the Kyoto treaty is signed. Then the cost will become the law of the land. The Kyoto treaty is like a purchase order that requires payment for the cure to a problem that might or might not be real. But the payment is very real, and very large. Judging by the outcry over the price of gasoline going up by $1.50 per gallon, I can assure you than virtually nobody would believe in the threat of global warming if they realized what it will cost them. Reply Edit vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Friday, June 16, 2006 12:15 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: [i]...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. Where did I say that? I was using the NO flooding as an example of a warning that went unheaded for years until it was too late. the powers that be at the top of the food chain were happy to believe that everything was Ok even though they were being warned by the minnows at the bottom of the food chain that the dikes were weak in several places. It also demonstrated how when push comes to shove and they repaired the dikes they did it the cheapest way possible instead of the best way possible. that doesnt bode well for how our government would handle a large serious long term emergency like increasing coastal flooding for the forseeable future and rising tempuratures everywhere else. Have fun with your trains Reply solzrules Member sinceJanuary 2006 From: SE Wisconsin 1,181 posts Posted by solzrules on Friday, June 16, 2006 10:02 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: [i]...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. Where did I say that? I was using the NO flooding as an example of a warning that went unheaded for years until it was too late. the powers that be at the top of the food chain were happy to believe that everything was Ok even though they were being warned by the minnows at the bottom of the food chain that the dikes were weak in several places. It also demonstrated how when push comes to shove and they repaired the dikes they did it the cheapest way possible instead of the best way possible. that doesnt bode well for how our government would handle a large serious long term emergency like increasing coastal flooding for the forseeable future and rising tempuratures everywhere else. My point was that New Orleans was the result of human error. Also, the scale of science involved with determining the structural integrity of a levee is much more precise than the science involved with the global atmosphere. There is not a consensus on the scope and depth of global warming. Shall we go into crisis mode when no one can say for sure what the crisis is? Past history has shown us that the heating and cooling of the earth is cyclical. Since the earth appears to be heating, do we have any reason to believe that this cycle is any different than the others? Also, the consensus seems to be that the last ice age was caused by greenhouse gases cooling the earth to the point that glaciers reigned supreme in North America as far south as Wisconsin. Question: Since there were no hydrocarbon emissions in pre-historic times how did this bring about the greenhouse affect required to produce the ice age? Was it volcanic activity? If so, how will human beings reducing the use of fossil fuels make any difference if only a volcano can trigger global cooling? I find it hard to believe that if we all drove hybrids we would somehow stave off ice age #2. Certainly there is no scientific proof of this. As for relying on the government to solve our problems - this is an iffy proposition at best. Governments by nature are slow to respond because even the best run government will have to follow the proper bureaucratic channels or choas will reign supreme. FEMA's disaster guidelines for local governments state that the local government should prepare for a 96 hour period of time in which FEMA will mobilize their assets to the proper locations (in other words - the local government is on their own for 96 hours and they better have a plan to cope. New Orleans did and they did not execute their plan. This is due to a lack of leadership at the local and state level). In the Katrina situation they met these guidlines. Unfortunately the local government didn't know which way was up and they were foundering even before the wind stopped blowing. These facts were conveniently over-looked in the desparate search for a scapegoat. You think this is bad? Just wait until inflation kicks in..... Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, June 17, 2006 8:58 AM Notice that in an attempt to boost the stature of the threat of global warming, every kind of malady is being linked to it as the cause. The other night I heard on NBC that poison ivy is going out of control from all the excess carbon dioxide. Not only is it getting bigger, but it is getting itchier too. The next thing you know, bird flu will be the result of global warming. One of the most obvious candidates for linkage to global warming as a cause is hurricanes. Yet hurricane scientists seem to be steadfast in their position that the apparent upsurge in hurricanes is not the result of global warming. I have heard that there is great political pressure being applied to these scientists to get onboard the global warming bandwagon. Therefore, I predict that within one year, there will be a universal consensus that hurricanes are increasing not only in number, but also in destructive ability as a direct result of man’s use of fossil fuels. Reply Edit zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Saturday, June 17, 2006 12:32 PM I read recently that the increase in the number of UFO sightings has gone up at about the same rate as the global temperature. D'ya think there's a connection? Space Aliens beaming infrared waves at our sky causing temps to rise! They are trying to melt all the ice and flood the lands. That's what happened when Noah built his ark. Soon the inhabitants of Venus will arrive in full force to claim the earth as their own, forcing us to do their bidding. They already messed up their own planet with carbon dioxide emissions, so now they need the earth. The Venusians already have their spies installed as the political leaders of the major countries, and they have secret meetings where they decide their strategies. Those citizens that disobey will be taken away in boxcars equipped with shackles and taken to the alien's secret bases which are now cleverly disguised as old military facilities.[alien] Reply 1234 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
[ 4. Give states and localities final say over federal land use decisions. After all, they are the ones who are most impacted by land management decisions. And stewardship begins at home. Let the locals decide how much timber to cut, how much land should be off limits, etc. Forbid out of state entities from interfering in local land use decisions on federal land. Well that's four, I'll let you ponder these before I add more.
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb If the polar ice cap melts there are already entrepenures who are negotiating for the shorter shipping routes from Russia to Europe across what they hope will be thru the former North Pole.[%-)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well that's four, I'll let you ponder these before I add more.
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Hey!!! You've been watching TLC too!!! And the records in the ice prove this has happened over and over and over again too. In fact all the other times was before industrialization. This is a natural cycle. What's your point. [#dots]
Have fun with your trains
QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb If the polar ice cap melts there are already entrepenures who are negotiating for the shorter shipping routes from Russia to Europe across what they hope will be thru the former North Pole.[%-)] So where's the North Pole going to be when the ice melts then???
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Hey!!! You've been watching TLC too!!! And the records in the ice prove this has happened over and over and over again too. In fact all the other times was before industrialization. This is a natural cycle. What's your point. [#dots] My point is that even though these climate fluctuations have been occurring since the formation of our planet, it is only in the last few centuries has man begun to inhabit in huge numbers the areas that are most affected by the climactic variations...hence the need for concern that human activity has tipped the scales of a system that has been functioning for millenia. Of course climate change has been happening for thousands of years. Ice ages come and go. 10,000 years ago Chicago and New York were under 1,000 feet of ice! The glaciers are what carved out the Great Lakes and gave the northern states their beautiful scenery. Who knows, maybe the climate is so sensitive to external fluctuations it will be like a big, heavy train at the top of a hill. Everything is fine as long as the weight on both sides of the hill are equal. But as soon as that train passes the point of no return by just one car length, it will begin its downhill roll. Very slowly at first, barely perceptable. But soon the momentum builds. And as any good engineer knows, once the hill is topped, you have to get the train under control RIGHT NOW, or else it soons becomes impossible and he has a runaway. No one yet knows how sensitive the atmosphere is to human influence. Perhaps, as futuremodal contends, human contribution is the proverbial drop in the bucket. Or perhaps human contribution will be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back. I can't help but wonder if it is worth the risk?
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Wow I'm going to keep my feet out of all the political he said she said going on here and try to stick to the science of the discussion. The point of the PBS "dimming sun" episode was not that the reflection is offsetting global warming, mearly lessening its current effect, however if the increasing amount of CO2 and pollutant particles continues there will be a tipping point where the amount of solar radiation retained by the CO2 will offset the mitigating effects of the reflection and lead to a rapid, RAPID increase in atmospheric temperatures worldwide. If that happens better start seeing what there wearing in Addis Adaba cause it will be getting that hot even in the northern latitudes. Part of the issue isnt whether these are recurring natural phenom or not, its that we've spent the last 5000 years building our major cities hugging the coastlines of the world, a rise is sea levels is going to have tremendous effects on everyone. As to ice cap melting and an apparent "who cares" attitude being displayed, if too much fresh water gets into the gulf stream, it will shut down or get redirected farther south, which could mean northeastern US and Canada will become climaticly more like Siberia and Katchakan penisula. Northern and central Europe will become much colder. If the Antarctic ice sheets go, forget it. We are going to face massive worldwide coastal flooding and mass MASS exodus of populations forced to move to higher ground. Massive relocations of port facilities and industries, refineries, and everything else inside the flood planes and the associated effects of new coastal erosion the wave action and tides of higher seas on areas of land not previously in the surf zone. Most estimates say that 20 feet rise worldwide would be the worst effects, but are we prepared to build 35 foot seawalls over 1000's of miles of coastline near major American cities??? could we afford to? If our governmant is renigging on replacing barriers in New Orleans because of costs, what kind of whining about the cost of multi-billion$ in seawalls over the course of hundreds of miles all over the country are we going to get? This stuff is coming, even George Bush finally agreed Global Warming is REAL, it will have REAL effects on everyone in this country, either directly thru higher sea levels, shifting weather patterns, hotter temps, or indirectly by the cumulative effects on our economy. Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood....
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood....
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Care to think what will happen if in the coming decade 50% of Florida and the gulf coast goes underwater and we have to perform a nationwide mass relocation that will make Katrina exodus look like a Mickey Mouse Club reunion? Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. Most people agree the most devestating problem in NO was tha depletion of wetlands due to changes on the Mississippi River and ACE flood control. Okay and the walls of the dikes fell over due to (termites?) they were too small? Man does affect his enviroment but mostly at his own parrell not the entire earths.
QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well that's four, I'll let you ponder these before I add more. Don't bother. It is a waist of your time and ours. Perphaps an enviromentel site would be interested.
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Better to get used to some of these possibilities so they wont be such a huge shock if they come to pass...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood....
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: [i]...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on.
QUOTE: [i]...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood....
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: [i]...everyone was sooooooo shocked by the flooding of New Orleans, everyone except the ones who were warning of it for YEARS before it finally happened, they just said 'we did warn you, you wouldnt listen, so there you are' Sounds like the scientist today warning of the coming flood.... how was the flooding of New Orleans the result of global warming? The hurricane didn't even hit the city head on. Where did I say that? I was using the NO flooding as an example of a warning that went unheaded for years until it was too late. the powers that be at the top of the food chain were happy to believe that everything was Ok even though they were being warned by the minnows at the bottom of the food chain that the dikes were weak in several places. It also demonstrated how when push comes to shove and they repaired the dikes they did it the cheapest way possible instead of the best way possible. that doesnt bode well for how our government would handle a large serious long term emergency like increasing coastal flooding for the forseeable future and rising tempuratures everywhere else.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.