The future of our planet

Rambles

Mame
Messages
225
Reaction score
299
Location
Eugene, OR
USDA Zone
8a

Says another Euro-Weenie
Love the discussion, but seriously, your ad hominem reposte needs work. Euroweenie? Sounds like some kind of meatless hotdog for the latterday yuppies or a forgettable summer comedy starring some kid I've never heard of.

You can do better. I have faith in you. We all do. Please don't let us down.
 

americanelmer

Shohin
Messages
252
Reaction score
104
Location
Pinellas County Florida
USDA Zone
9b
"Euroweenie? Sounds like some kind of meatless hotdog for the latterday yuppies or a forgettable summer comedy starring some kid I've never heard of."

What a great definition! Sums them up perfectly. Good job.

Here are some more definitions:
Q.E.D -was zu beweisen war.
Rain Forest - Jungle as in grows like a jungle.Not disappearing for any appreciable length of time.

'acidifies the ocean '- 352,670,000,000,000,000,000 gallons of water according to the U.S. Geological Survey. How much CO2 would you have to add to make any changes.
Acid rain - Not heard about for 20 years or so.
Coral reefs - Not dying.

Questions?
Have you ever seen Angkor Wat with the trees growing over the stone temples?
Have you seen the threads on this web site where folks have tried to duplicate them by doing root over rock. Do you think they came up with that concept by themselves?

Do you remember when Saddam Hussein set fire to the oil fields in Iraq and the Euro-weenies were saying that the ecology was destroyed for ever? No trace of it now.

Do you remember when the BP deep well blew out in the Gulf of Mexico?
It was supposed to destroy the ecology of the entire southern US coastline. I live a mile (1.609344 kilometers for you euro-weenies) from the coast - it is beautiful and pristine with No, None, Nada signs that anything ever happened.

Acid rain? do you remember that from the 1970's? It was supposedly destroying the forests in the eastern US. Turns out that the vegetation was causing the runoff to acidify the lakes in the Adirondak mountains. In the 1700's the government sold nearly all the original public acreage of about 7 million acres for pennies an acre. Lumbermen were welcomed to the interior, with few restraints, resulting in massive deforestation (clear cut). They rebounded and are lush now.

Every environmental 'disaster' that has been bleated about over the last 40 or 50 years has turned out to be a big nothingburger. The Earth has an infinite ability shrug off these minuscule blips.

Fossil Fuels? How did there get to be enough fossils at the bottom of the oceans or in the deserts of Saudi Arabia to make hundreds of billions of barrels (42 gallons each- 158.987294928 Liters for you euro-weenies)of oil and still counting. Here is a hint - fossils have nothing to do with it. The earth creates it as a natural never-ending process. The reason they were called fossil fuels is because of the LaBrea Tar pits where animals got trapped in the tar and it was erroneously surmised that was what created the tar.

There is much much more that is believed that is not what really is but is used by politicians, environmental wackos, and people who are scared of their own shadows to control other people ( and never themselves -- see Al Gore,etc.). So please spare me the sky is falling rhetoric as it has proven over the last 50 or so years to be baloney.

A_E
 

coh

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
5,782
Reaction score
6,824
Location
Rochester, NY
USDA Zone
6
So, Coh, will you be the first to give up your car, turn off the A/C and heater, TV and computer, refuse to buy anything wrapped in plastic, decline buying anything from the Earth-raping China? Get back to me on that one.
I do plenty but as noted before, what you and I do on the individual level isn't enough. It's the bare minimum, and we must continue to apply pressure to governments as this is a global problem. Plants aren't going to solve this for us no matter how much you hope for it...if they were, the co2 level wouldn't still be rising at the same rate it was 50 years ago.
 

americanelmer

Shohin
Messages
252
Reaction score
104
Location
Pinellas County Florida
USDA Zone
9b
"if they were, the co2 level wouldn't still be rising at the same rate it was 50 years ago."

WOW you just blew your whole argument with this statement. Thank you for clarifying.

A_E
 

M. Frary

Bonsai Godzilla
Messages
14,307
Reaction score
22,120
Location
Mio Michigan
USDA Zone
4
Weenies,weenies,weenies!
Someone really seems to like them.
 

americanelmer

Shohin
Messages
252
Reaction score
104
Location
Pinellas County Florida
USDA Zone
9b
Hey Frary, here is a real American elm and mine. Notice the similarities?

Yours looks nothing like the real one and never will.

A_E

American elm.png
American_Elm_momma.jpg
 

Paradox

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
9,429
Reaction score
11,632
Location
Long Island, NY
USDA Zone
7a
Yes, thankfully, our environment is resiliant in many instances, but that does not mean it can accept a bottomless pit of abuse for decades and not have lasting impacts.
That also does not mean that humans don't have long lasting impacts.

Acid Rain

We dont hear about acid rain so much any more because environmental regulations have reduced sulphur dioxide emmissions by 40% resulting in a 65% drop in acid rain

"Overall, the program's cap and trade program has been successful in achieving its goals. Since the 1990s, SO2 emissions have dropped 40%, and according to the Pacific Research Institute, acid rain levels have dropped 65% since 1976.[29][30]"

29: 'Cap-and-trade' model eyed for cutting greenhouse gases, San Francisco Chronicle, December 3, 2007.
30: Jump up^ "Facts On File News Services Databases". 2facts.com. Retrieved 2010-11-18.[permanent dead link]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain

http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/educ/acidrain.aspx

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/acid-rain/


Coral bleaching and ocean acidification

Loss of corals documented world wide

https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification

https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching

http://time.com/coral/


Loss of Rain Forests

Also documented world wide

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_of_the_Amazon_rainforest

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-talks-daily-destruction/


BP Oil Spill Lingering Effects and signs of recovery


Some recovery has happened. Thanks to petroleum eating bacteria, most of the oil is gone. Long term effects on the wildlife are still unknown.

https://response.restoration.noaa.g...ting-impacts-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill.html

https://www.npr.org/2015/04/20/4003...oil-spill-effects-linger-and-recovery-is-slow

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/26/muc...pill-has-disappeared-because-of-bacteria.html
 

americanelmer

Shohin
Messages
252
Reaction score
104
Location
Pinellas County Florida
USDA Zone
9b
Quoting all those left wing sites and organizations (including the EPA) does not your argument make.

This one is the best though:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/26/muc...pill-has-disappeared-because-of-bacteria.html with the help of
In other words the ocean with the help of natural oil eating bacteria has healed itself.
Where did the bacteria come from.

At the time of the deepwater horiizon I said and maintained that within 2 years there would be no sign of or talk about it.
I was correct,
You still got nothing.

A_E
 

ianb

Shohin
Messages
470
Reaction score
364
Location
Mission Viejo, CA
USDA Zone
10a

Rambles

Mame
Messages
225
Reaction score
299
Location
Eugene, OR
USDA Zone
8a
Your grasp of geochemistry and geophysics is astounding.

Seriously though, it's true, Russian scientist in the late 40's and early 50's I believe started researching the possibility of abiogenic petroleum. In the time since, what has been found has been less than convincing, but not ruled out as a possibility. (easy to show in the lab, not so much in the wild)

I doubt you'll read it, as it's from one of those liberal, left wing, oil-industry sponsored journals, but I'll tip my hat to you with this: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:338107/FULLTEXT01.pdf

As to coral bleaching. Seen it with my own eyes sweetcheeks. But, hey, don't worry about. You just keep pokin' them weinies, sir. Poke'em good!
 

Zach Smith

Omono
Messages
1,513
Reaction score
2,853
Location
St. Francisville, LA
USDA Zone
8
I love these "scientific consensus" signed by government or UN-funded scientists whose livelihoods depend on continued grants from governments or the UN. Wonder what conclusions they're going to draw. Imagine, if you will, our future when enough control has been ceded or seized and it's determined that us producing more humans will harm the planet and something must be done. Only one solution to that. We might call if the "Final Solution," to use a catchy phrase. We can start with one child per family, forced abortions if you mess up, and if that doesn't work then the old folks are only useless eaters anyway. Zyklon B is cheap to produce.

AGW or climate change or climate disruption or the term du jour is a hoax. They've been manipulating what data they didn't purge or ignore for decades. A nice-size volcanic eruption does more pollution than all of Europe for a comparable period: “The sulfur dioxide (SO2) emitted from the Holuhraun eruption has reached up to 60,000 tons per day and averaged close to 20,000 tons since it began,” notes Pall Stefanson, in a September 25 report for Iceland Review Online. “For comparison, all the SO2 pollution in Europe, from industries, energy production, traffic and house heating, etc., amounts to 14,000 tons per day.” (https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech...llution-dwarfs-all-of-europes-human-emissions). So we have to impoverish ourselves because we're the cause of all the problems. (Our masters, of course, will not join us in poverty.)

I say all of this as a former scientist myself (I'm not on government grants, so don't have to fit in with the political "consensus" to keep getting them), so I get why they think they can get away with it because most people today have been mis-educated and end up clueless and easy to sway with emotional appeals (think polar bears on ice floes). Predicting the temperature of the planet - what is the correct temperature, anyway? no one ever says - within a few degrees 100 years from now is total BS. The earth makes a poor laboratory, because you can't control any of the variables. That's why weather forecasts are never very accurate more than about 10 days out. If you can't make a computer model that's completely accurate a year from now, why would you think you could make one that's accurate 100 years from now? I mean, come on. What's truly mind-boggling is that anyone would say you could - especially all the "scientists" who sign those declarations and theoretically should know better. But of course we understand what drives the consensus.
 

Anthony

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,290
Reaction score
8,389
Location
West Indies [ Caribbean ]
USDA Zone
13
Zach,

I am not sure one can do much about stopping a volcanic eruption.
I would like to believe that we have the ability to collect and solidify
the problems.

Nice to see you are a scientist. Perhaps when you move to the islands
you can get them to build proper houses, and stop the crybaby
attitude, every time shacks get blown away.

You should see what we have to deal with and the 'floods", or "houses".

Battle on oh armchair generals, your Internet troops are waiting.
Good Day
Anthony
 

Paradox

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
9,429
Reaction score
11,632
Location
Long Island, NY
USDA Zone
7a
Quoting all those left wing sites and organizations (including the EPA) does not your argument make

A_E

Neither does looking put your living room window and making grandiose statements about the global environment.

According to you anyone that has a pro envionment stance is left wing liberal.

I will take the word and research of a professional scientist and well established and respected publications that do the investigative reporting over a "backyard scientist" blinded by his own bias. You could be drowning in your own shit but still think everything is fine.



@Zach Smith
The scientists that work at NOAA, NMFS and NWS are not funded by grants and are not paid to have a certain opinion.
I would wager most university scientists would be thrown out on their ass if they were part of such a scheme. They would not want to risk the reputation of the institution on bad science.

Most of the time organizations that pay "scientists" for certain outcomes usually are in it for the profit.

How about private environmental testing companies skewing the results of biassay tests to show that the pollution their clients (chemical companies) are spewing out onto the environment aren't as bad as the real test results so the client doesn't get fined.

I know it happens, I worked for a testing company that falsified results because if they didnt, the client would find someone that would.
 

Vance Wood

Lord Mugo
Messages
14,002
Reaction score
16,913
Location
Michigan
USDA Zone
5-6
Fake news!

How can people be so biased, so ignorant?...
That's the way it is with you Alain, you can't disagree without tossing out epithets like ignorant and biased not realizing that by doing so you are also being ignorant and biased.
 

Zach Smith

Omono
Messages
1,513
Reaction score
2,853
Location
St. Francisville, LA
USDA Zone
8
Neither does looking put your living room window and making grandiose statements about the global environment.

According to you anyone that has a pro envionment stance is left wing liberal.

I will take the word and research of a professional scientist and well established and respected publications that do the investigative reporting over a "backyard scientist" blinded by his own bias. You could be drowning in your own shit but still think everything is fine.



@Zach Smith
The scientists that work at NOAA, NMFS and NWS are not funded by grants and are not paid to have a certain opinion.
I would wager most university scientists would be thrown out on their ass if they were part of such a scheme. They would not want to risk the reputation of the institution on bad science.

Most of the time organizations that pay "scientists" for certain outcomes usually are in it for the profit.

How about private environmental testing companies skewing the results of biassay tests to show that the pollution their clients (chemical companies) are spewing out onto the environment aren't as bad as the real test results so the client doesn't get fined.

I know it happens, I worked for a testing company that falsified results because if they didnt, the client would find someone that would.
Government scientists may not be subject to grant-related bias, but I can almost guarantee you they come from universities long ago overwhelmed by Marxist ideology. This is a bias you aren't going to overcome, as it shuts off the mind.

I do not dispute that private companies can get biased results from their scientists. Big Pharma has been doing this for a hundred years now. It's why we had the cholesterol fraud since the 1970s. The point I'm trying to make is that any scientist who thinks he or she can predict the temperature of the planet 100 years from now is blowing smoke. They're either frauds, liars or just poor scientists. Lab science is hard enough when you can control variables. Earth science a century hence is absurd.
 

Vance Wood

Lord Mugo
Messages
14,002
Reaction score
16,913
Location
Michigan
USDA Zone
5-6
Government scientists may not be subject to grant-related bias, but I can almost guarantee you they come from universities long ago overwhelmed by Marxist ideology. This is a bias you aren't going to overcome, as it shuts off the mind.

I do not dispute that private companies can get biased results from their scientists. Big Pharma has been doing this for a hundred years now. It's why we had the cholesterol fraud since the 1970s. The point I'm trying to make is that any scientist who thinks he or she can predict the temperature of the planet 100 years from now is blowing smoke. They're either frauds, liars or just poor scientists. Lab science is hard enough when you can control variables. Earth science a century hence is absurd.
Hoockey Smokes Rocky, the voice of reason.
 

americanelmer

Shohin
Messages
252
Reaction score
104
Location
Pinellas County Florida
USDA Zone
9b
"According to you anyone that has a pro envionment stance is left wing liberal."

What is a pro envionment stance?

BTW you spelled environment incorrectly.

A_E
 
Top Bottom