quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing is, in my view, that we can do what we can, individually, and the greater the land holding the more impact.

But there are lots of stuff that we can't do individually. We just don't have the capacity or authority.

That's where the Govt. comes in, such as the EPA. That's why Govt. was invented.

People, like Lane, who claim whatever, also support gutting the EPA.

Go figure.

I know Doc Lane as well as you do so take this for what it's worth:
If Doc and others use their thousands of acres to "Carbon offset" with trees and responsible grazing, water management and air quality considerations, is there anything else?

Again, I don't know, but I doubt the guy burns old tires or dumps waste oil on the ground. I doubt he grazes to bare ground nor does he drain his septic into the creek. My guess is Doc makes every effort all day every day to leave some land for his kids in better shape than he found it. Taller and more trees, greener pastures, clearer water, bluer skies. We all want that, I want that for my baby. Leaving a mess to clean up or a mess to abandon is in none of our wills to our offspring.

Who doesn't want our kids to discover trout in the water behind the house? Who doesn't want to be woken up by a little girl who saw game out the window way to early on the morning?

We're all environmentalists, we all should be.

Maybe after reading all this baloney Doc will go plant another dozen trees somewhere, that'll be better than most will do.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing is, in my view, that we can do what we can, individually, and the greater the land holding the more impact.

But there are lots of stuff that we can't do individually. We just don't have the capacity or authority.

That's where the Govt. comes in, such as the EPA. That's why Govt. was invented.

People, like Lane, who claim whatever, also support gutting the EPA.

Go figure.

I know Doc Lane as well as you do so take this for what it's worth:
If Doc and others use their thousands of acres to "Carbon offset" with trees and responsible grazing, water management and air quality considerations, is there anything else?

Again, I don't know, but I doubt the guy burns old tires or dumps waste oil on the ground. I doubt he grazes to bare ground nor does he drain his septic into the creek. My guess is Doc makes every effort all day every day to leave some land for his kids in better shape than he found it. Taller and more trees, greener pastures, clearer water, bluer skies. We all want that, I want that for my baby. Leaving a mess to clean up or a mess to abandon is in none of our wills to our offspring.

Who doesn't want our kids to discover trout in the water behind the house? Who doesn't want to be woken up by a little girl who saw game out the window way to early on the morning?

We're all environmentalists, we all should be.

Maybe after reading all this baloney Doc will go plant another dozen trees somewhere, that'll be better than most will do.

Here's the thing: I'll bet you are correct about the way Dr. Easter takes care of HIS land, at the same time he contributes to and votes for radical politicians who not only deny anthropomorphic climate change but actively work to make it worse, politicians who kneecap renewable energy just out of spite or because they are beholden to oil interests, vote against improved vehicle emission standards or water quality protection or any of 100 other initiatives just because of who supports them. He'll shit directly on the Endangered Species Act but carefully dispose of his toilet paper.

Hey Sarge, -- and ME

Here's some interesting stats on renewal/wind energy - that should surprise you,
https://www.visualcapitalist.c...generation-by-state/

State Wind Electricity Generation (Terawatt hours) Wind's Share of Net Electricity Generation
Texas 92.9 TWh 20%
Iowa 34.1 TWh 58%
Oklahoma29.6 TWh 35%
Kansas 23.5 TWh 43%
Illinois17.1 TWh 10%
Californ13.6 TWh 7%
N Dakota13.2 TWh 31%
Colorado12.7 TWh 23%
Minnesot12.2 TWh 22%
Nebraska8.7 TWh 24%

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Hey Sarge, -- and ME

Here's some interesting stats on renewal/wind energy - that should surprise you,
https://www.visualcapitalist.c...generation-by-state/

State Wind Electricity Generation (Terawatt hours) Wind's Share of Net Electricity Generation
Texas 92.9 TWh 20%
Iowa 34.1 TWh 58%
Oklahoma29.6 TWh 35%
Kansas 23.5 TWh 43%
Illinois17.1 TWh 10%
Californ13.6 TWh 7%
N Dakota13.2 TWh 31%
Colorado12.7 TWh 23%
Minnesot12.2 TWh 22%
Nebraska8.7 TWh 24%

Excellent point. Texas, the leading solar generator, had NO bids for offered offshore leases a couple days ago because of the political climate Republicans have built up on the subject, with nonsense like this.

quote:

After decades of support for renewable energy made Texas able to produce more wind power than any other state, its political leaders have turned against wind and solar. This year, they’re pushing through legislation to prop up fossil fuel-burning power plants instead.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
I'm no expert. I'm just sayin' that I'll choose to trust in scientists over Rightists.

Most 5 year olds can say their ABCs - J comes before K - and we just got to J, while 18 years ago, we got to K at roughly the same time --

"unprecedented" ?? a,b,c,d,e,f,g ... etc

Even a 5 year old can understand that

quote:

I think wildfires are largely attributable to drought, which is largely attributable to climate change.

Droughts are a normal occurrence of weather patterns. Droughts and other weather pattern can last for many years. They have caused some ancient civilizations to collapse. Was there 'global warming' then?

This right here is the reason we are having the summer that is happening:

https://www.space.com/tonga-vo...-ever-warmed-climate

Pretty fascinating as to what the Earth's forces can do.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:

quote:

I think wildfires are largely attributable to drought, which is largely attributable to climate change.

Droughts are a normal occurrence of weather patterns. Droughts and other weather pattern can last for many years. They have caused some ancient civilizations to collapse. Was there 'global warming' then?

This right here is the reason we are having the summer that is happening:

https://www.space.com/tonga-vo...-ever-warmed-climate

Pretty fascinating as to what the Earth's forces can do.

There really is nothing you aren't willing to outright lie about, is there?

quote:

Water in the stratosphere generally warms Earth's surface. So this could actually contribute to some surface level warming of Earth over the next few years.

Scientists might do better to propose realistic solutions and to quit banging the drum quite so hard. Present the data and let people draw conclusions. Place blame where it lies. Don't just blame one industry or one group. Don't throw stones while living in a glass house. Live what you preach. Regards, Bill

quote:

Present the data and let people draw conclusions.

I think they did that already.

However, the ideological pre-conclusions Trumped the science. pun intended

So, where is the stone wall re realistic solutions?

If the problem is denied, then where is the problem?

Well, some of us think the problem is the denial itself.

quote:

There really is nothing you aren't willing to outright lie about, is there?

quote:
Water in the stratosphere generally warms Earth's surface. So this could actually contribute to some surface level warming of Earth over the next few years.

Can't help ya. You think everything is a lie that does not fit your mental capacity. That volcanic eruption has very much has affected weather patterns world wide.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weat...0f1b1d6a699bd6&ei=21

Forty Years Ago, EPA Scientists Warned About Climate Change. How Accurate Were Their Predictions?
Story by Dave Levitan •
3h

And again, elephant in the room is too many people
One suggestion would be, the loudest ones could simply eliminate their own family tree by jumping off the cliff thus lessen carbon foot print?
Anyone ever thought of when you save life, you get step closer to more carbon in atmosphere?
Kinda crazy thought but in some ways actual truth

Someday it's gonna get zero-sum real quick:

https://www.sciencealert.com/m...y-scientist-predicts

Major 'Population Correction' Coming For Humanity, Scientist Predicts
ENVIRONMENT
18 August 2023
ByDAVID NIELD

"In the best of all possible worlds, the whole transition might actually be managed in ways that prevent unnecessary suffering of millions (billions?) of people, but this is not happening – and cannot happen – in a world blind to its own predicament," writes Rees.

================================================

IMO, it's already proven that some sort of "managed transition" is a fantasy. Climate science deniers and anti-vaxxers have shown us the future.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...13f6be74e51b55&ei=44

Scientists were sure climate change was bad for polar bears. Now they know how bad.
Story by Doyle Rice, USA TODAY •
3h

At one time in our past history, we had an ice age that covered virtually the entire planet, Of course that was before records were kept.

Grizz

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly Adams1:
At one time in our past history, we had an ice age that covered virtually the entire planet, Of course that was before records were kept.

Grizz

And before billions depended on industrial agriculture. That is civilization's weakness.

quote:

Can't help ya. You think everything is a lie that does not fit your mental capacity. That volcanic eruption has very much has affected weather patterns world wide.

Volcanic eruptions are part of the natural balance that made life possible in the 1st place. I know it's over your head.

Volcanic eruptions are often discussed in relation to climate change because they release CO2 (and other gases) into our atmosphere. However, human contributions to the carbon cycle are more than 100 times those from all the volcanoes in the world - combined.

In comparison, while volcanic eruptions do cause an increase in atmospheric CO2, human activities emit a Mount St. Helens-sized eruption of CO2 every 2.5 hours and a Mount Pinatubo-sized eruption of CO2 twice daily.

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/4...with-climate-change/

The good news is, the earth is resilient.
After being told The Great Barrier Reef was going to die off from climate change just two years ago... It has made a rebound in recovery.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...19d4a40a37a591&ei=18

Expert sounds the alarm after U.S. Supreme Court sides with couple wanting to build house at protected site
Story by Laurelle Stelle •
2h

Scalia started the slippery slope.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weat...0f1b1d6a699bd6&ei=21

Forty Years Ago, EPA Scientists Warned About Climate Change. How Accurate Were Their Predictions?
Story by Dave Levitan •
3h

Isaac Asimov predicted climate change in the 1960s, in one of his non-fiction books. Not much of this discussion is new.

We will need a lot of terawatt hours to fabricate a net-zero energy economy, and most of those watt hours will come from fossil fuels.

It is a waste of mental energy to keep talking in terms of either/or, when we need to think about generation and transmission.

Nothing says there's no climate emergency like 5 of the biggest insurers leaving the climate emergency market...

Link

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Nothing says there's no climate emergency like 5 of the biggest insurers leaving the climate emergency market...

Link

And shipping companies moving north to use the Northwest Passage.

https://globalnews.ca/news/793...oner-than-you-think/

Money talks...

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Nothing says there's no climate emergency like 5 of the biggest insurers leaving the climate emergency market...

Link

And shipping companies moving north to use the Northwest Passage.

https://globalnews.ca/news/793...oner-than-you-think/

Money talks...

It's just weather, some days are warmer than others.

So why are the folks who are pushing for emission reductions insisting on methods that are counterproductive?

Solar requires manufacturing… which apparently is a nonissue as long as it occurs in another country.

Where is the support for nuclear and upgrading the grid to utilize it?

Instead these maroons fly to Davos in private jets while air conditioning multiple mansions.

I will buy the folks believe it’s an issue when they support a practical solution instead of one that makes money for them and their causes.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
So why are the folks who are pushing for emission reductions insisting on methods that are counterproductive?

Solar requires manufacturing… which apparently is a nonissue as long as it occurs in another country.

Where is the support for nuclear and upgrading the grid to utilize it?

Instead these maroons fly to Davos in private jets while air conditioning multiple mansions.

I will buy the folks believe it’s an issue when they support a practical solution instead of one that makes money for them and their causes.

Bullshit, you'll come up with another list of half-assed whines, we've seen the act since Al Gore.

Hydro Quebec could supply half the eastern seaboard. But we would rather give handouts and build wind and solar that are not 100% reliable. It makes no sense to me.

Ok, so how exactly is a carbon tax going to work?

Only imposed on the developed nations yet the coal fired plants are being built rapidly in China and the third world?

Insisting on using solar that is being made in these countries with reliance on coal…

Shutting down hydroelectric plants in the US… why again?

Obviously, there are some cows that are more sacred.


I don’t have an issue with improving the grid. That sounds like a reasonable use of public funds.

I don’t have any objection to making new nuclear power plants… if the government makes enough of them to reduce electricity costs, gee, you would see decreased objections to electric heat, e vehicles, etc (if it costs me $ 0.18/mile for petrol based vehicles, but would cost 0.018/mile for electricity, what do you think happens?

The problem with the “solutions” is they are put on as a tax instead of a reduction in price on the other side.

Lots of folks put in solar or brought e vehicles when there was a tax credit that made them cheaper. Imagine what it would do if the price of electricity was 1% of what it is now? Of course, that would not give the folks wanting control the ability to mandate crap…

Sorry, but when a scientist states that an untried solution is the best option, you know he’s not using science.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
So why are the folks who are pushing for emission reductions insisting on methods that are counterproductive?

Solar requires manufacturing… which apparently is a nonissue as long as it occurs in another country.

Where is the support for nuclear and upgrading the grid to utilize it?

Instead these maroons fly to Davos in private jets while air conditioning multiple mansions.

I will buy the folks believe it’s an issue when they support a practical solution instead of one that makes money for them and their causes.

Bullshit, you'll come up with another list of half-assed whines, we've seen the act since Al Gore.

The amount of unnecessary lights left on 24/7 boggles the mind. Talk about easy to institute-turn the fucking light off. Talk about easy to measure-what was the bill last month compared to this month. What do you reckon New York City metro area’s nightly electric bill is? Just for perspective? Now multiply that times Chicago, LA, Seattle, Nashville, Houston, etc. I know it will never happen and you’ve already thought of the hundredth reason why, but GD I know your Mom said the same thing, shut the lights off when you’re done! Meanwhile every town and city in every state is lit up like Christmas and the 4th all rolled into one 24/7 365.

And still nobody gives Joe Biden credit for curing the scourge of windmill cancer that was ravaging the Country...

True Greenies are idiots
Plain and simple
Nuclear energy is probably the most efficient and best solution in near future

I desire the efforts were on nuclear power.

Personally, I think we need to look at corn subsidies, ethanol, as a bane to wetland conservation. That being a sub-issue.

How about blaming it entirely on human overpopulation?
There is more and more of us and we keep releasing methane gas left and right…

quote:

Originally posted by Bivoj:
How about blaming it entirely on human overpopulation?
There is more and more of us and we keep releasing methane gas left and right…

The climate we had could have supported 8 billion if agriculture hadn't been so tightly bound to petroleum, but you have to bear in mind that the atmosphere acts like a very large flywheel, and the next 30 or so years are set; what will be from now to 2050 will be. Nothing we do tomorrow will change it.

What we do next will mostly affect whether it's getting worse or better headed into 2060. Industrial agriculture may be just a memory by then.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Notable that neither of the Nobel Prize winners featured among signatories are climatologists or meteorologists, and didn't get their Nobels for anything climate related, almost none of the Professors and Doctors noted are meteorologists or climatologists, but several notably work/worked for the oil industry, and the couple who ARE meteorologists or climatologists are notable only for their climate change denialism.

So, what are Al Gore's, one of the worst doom criers out there , credentials ?

Grizz

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly Adams1:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Notable that neither of the Nobel Prize winners featured among signatories are climatologists or meteorologists, and didn't get their Nobels for anything climate related, almost none of the Professors and Doctors noted are meteorologists or climatologists, but several notably work/worked for the oil industry, and the couple who ARE meteorologists or climatologists are notable only for their climate change denialism.

So, what are Al Gore's, one of the worst doom criers out there , credentials ?

Grizz

Being right since 1976.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly Adams1:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Notable that neither of the Nobel Prize winners featured among signatories are climatologists or meteorologists, and didn't get their Nobels for anything climate related, almost none of the Professors and Doctors noted are meteorologists or climatologists, but several notably work/worked for the oil industry, and the couple who ARE meteorologists or climatologists are notable only for their climate change denialism.

So, what are Al Gore's, one of the worst doom criers out there , credentials ?

Grizz

Being right since 1976.

Gore is the perfect example of a climate hypocrite. He preaches living the green life, yet his carbon footprint is immense.

I just can’t wrap my head around the idea that he actually believes what he preaches, or that anyone else would.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly Adams1:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Notable that neither of the Nobel Prize winners featured among signatories are climatologists or meteorologists, and didn't get their Nobels for anything climate related, almost none of the Professors and Doctors noted are meteorologists or climatologists, but several notably work/worked for the oil industry, and the couple who ARE meteorologists or climatologists are notable only for their climate change denialism.

So, what are Al Gore's, one of the worst doom criers out there , credentials ?

Grizz

Being right since 1976.

Gore is the perfect example of a climate hypocrite. He preaches living the green life, yet his carbon footprint is immense.

I just can’t wrap my head around the idea that he actually believes what he preaches, or that anyone else would.

That lie was old by the end of 2007, when it started circulating.

Al Gore has always said that the most important things people can do is reduce their own generation of CO2 where possible, which he does, offset their necessary emissions elsewhere in the carbon economy by supporting carbon capture projects, which he does to the point that he has a negative footprint, and educate and advocate for policies to stop and, eventually, reverse the damage, which he does.

He practices exactly what he preaches, but since all you care about is Fox News sound bites you couldn't know that.

can't spit that hook out , can you-
you poor carp