help help global warming,ice age, ozone hole y2k rainforest alert

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:China and India will never reach the US levels. There are just not enough resources.

LOL. people have been saying that for 100 years. and the resources always materialize as the price changes and technology improves.

[Anonymous]

Managing the effects of pollution is many, many multiples harder than preventing it. If emissions control is politically impossible, then we are screwed. for every lost crop, well ha e to come up with a new crop. For every farm a new farm. Well have to come up with ways to treat respiratory disease but the problem is that there is no cure for fine particulates in lung tissue, which is why people wi emphysema are screwed. If a 25% drop in home values is a "crisis" you are going to love a doubling of food prices. Don't expect science to save you. The scientists are screaming for a political solution, because they know the implications. Take for example carbon sequestration. Do you see the problem? Forcing carbon into the earth requires so much energy it will take more emissions than it sequesters. Its basic entropy. You can spill a bottle of ink with a twist of your wrist, but reversing your action takes huge amounts of effort.

The most feasible solution is still the political one. Technology can take the edge off the problem by making energy cleaner. So stop throwing up your hands over china and India. You are betting on a technological solution when the techies are telling you it won't be there.

[Anonymous]

OWS proves that.....it took no effort for them to meander over to McPherson square. But the poor Hispanic and black sanitation workers had to clean up the scabies, vomit, t b , dead grass, fecal matter. Piles of litter, urine, sperm stains, general filth , built up gook, and left leaning flyers. It was gross and disgusting. You know.... Like pollution and stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Managing the effects of pollution is many, many multiples harder than preventing it. If emissions control is politically impossible, then we are screwed. for every lost crop, well ha e to come up with a new crop. For every farm a new farm. Well have to come up with ways to treat respiratory disease but the problem is that there is no cure for fine particulates in lung tissue, which is why people wi emphysema are screwed. If a 25% drop in home values is a "crisis" you are going to love a doubling of food prices. Don't expect science to save you. The scientists are screaming for a political solution, because they know the implications. Take for example carbon sequestration. Do you see the problem? Forcing carbon into the earth requires so much energy it will take more emissions than it sequesters. Its basic entropy. You can spill a bottle of ink with a twist of your wrist, but reversing your action takes huge amounts of effort.

The most feasible solution is still the political one. Technology can take the edge off the problem by making energy cleaner. So stop throwing up your hands over china and India. You are betting on a technological solution when the techies are telling you it won't be there.

I disagree. the scientific/technological solution is much much cheaper than a political one. Has food production kept up with population or not? You don't think genetic crop production is going to blow away current techniques? fish farms, growing meat separate from animals? size of fruits and vegetables? way way easier than PAYING India and China and Brazil, et al, not to advance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Managing the effects of pollution is many, many multiples harder than preventing it. If emissions control is politically impossible, then we are screwed. for every lost crop, well ha e to come up with a new crop. For every farm a new farm. Well have to come up with ways to treat respiratory disease but the problem is that there is no cure for fine particulates in lung tissue, which is why people wi emphysema are screwed. If a 25% drop in home values is a "crisis" you are going to love a doubling of food prices. Don't expect science to save you. The scientists are screaming for a political solution, because they know the implications. Take for example carbon sequestration. Do you see the problem? Forcing carbon into the earth requires so much energy it will take more emissions than it sequesters. Its basic entropy. You can spill a bottle of ink with a twist of your wrist, but reversing your action takes huge amounts of effort.

The most feasible solution is still the political one. Technology can take the edge off the problem by making energy cleaner. So stop throwing up your hands over china and India. You are betting on a technological solution when the techies are telling you it won't be there.

I disagree. the scientific/technological solution is much much cheaper than a political one. Has food production kept up with population or not? You don't think genetic crop production is going to blow away current techniques? fish farms, growing meat separate from animals? size of fruits and vegetables? way way easier than PAYING India and China and Brazil, et al, not to advance.

You don't know enough about these fields. Bushels per acre is leveling off, and cost per bushel is already going up due to energy costs. Growing meat separate from animals is a chemistry experiment which has not even remotely feasible. You can dream that it will work but lab grown meat will probably never work. Why? You need an energy source as cheap as the sun and a chemical conversion process as efficient as a cow, with hundreds of millions of years of evolution behind it. That's why solar cells, which have been around since the 1830's, still can't approach the efficiency of your average garden weed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Awesome illistration of how liberals know so much that isn't true....

Decreased snowfalls are due to global warming!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d70iXVN5EVM&feature=player_embedded#

increased snowfalls are due to global warming.

http://blog.algore.com/2011/02/an_answer_for_bill.html

And I just heard someone on TV that hot summers are also evidence of global warming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome illistration of how liberals know so much that isn't true....

Decreased snowfalls are due to global warming!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d70iXVN5EVM&feature=player_embedded#

increased snowfalls are due to global warming.

http://blog.algore.com/2011/02/an_answer_for_bill.html

And I just heard someone on TV that hot summers are also evidence of global warming.

Climate science is getting good enough that in fact scientists are beginning to report the odds of certain weather events being caused by global warming. Some events are and some aren't. But they aren't all uniformly warming events. Anybody who has lived near the Great Lakes understands how warmer temperatures can increase snowfall.

[Anonymous]

Mitt Romney can verify that global warming is real. He's starting to sweat right now.