Expert: We must act fast on warming

Sep 24, 2008 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Kansas.com

Droughts, melting ice caps and glaciers, rising sea levels and mass extinctions will all be a reality unless the U.S. and the world cut back on carbon emissions dramatically, said James Hansen, director of ...

Comments (Page 1,269)

Showing posts 25,361 - 25,380 of26,831
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26222
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
You never quit, do you? The reason they legislated that the pollutants were scrubbed out was because of acid rain and health concerns. Do you advocate a return to Black Friday as in Los Angeles in 1949?
The first National Air Pollution Symposium in the United States was held in 1949 and hosted by Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International).[7] At first, smaller governments were responsible for the passage and enforcement of such legislation.[8] The main purpose of the Air Pollution Control Act of 1955 was to provide research assistance to find a way to control air pollution from its source. A total of $5 million was granted to the public health service for a five-year period to conduct this research.[6] According to a private website, the amount was $3 million allotted per year for the five-year period of research.[9]
Effects of the Act
This was the first act from the government that made U.S. citizens and policy makers aware of this global problem. Unfortunately, this act did little to prevent air pollution, but it at least made government aware that this was a national problem. The act allowed Congress to reserve the right to control this growing problem.[10] The Air Pollution Control Act of 1955 was the first federal law regarding air pollution. This act began to inform the public about the hazards of air pollution and detailed new emissions standards. Wiki
And one of the unintended consequence of that Air Pollution Control Act of 1955 was that reducing pollution allowed the earth to warm. Of course also they also passed more laws in the seventies that did reduce air pollution.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26223
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And one of the unintended consequence of that Air Pollution Control Act of 1955 was that reducing pollution allowed the earth to warm. Of course also they also passed more laws in the seventies that did reduce air pollution.
You didn't answer the question.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26224
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Only you would come up with the idea of cooking coal for dinner. Cooking dinner with coal on the other hand has happened in the past. Just as people also used wood to cook dinner with. Both have also been used to heat homes in the past.
No surprise there the response was way beyond your comprehension abilities. Well any way I do have ideas and for you that would be a zero. See why youíre Less than a Box of Rocks?

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26225
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't answer the question.
Look in your post 26221. Notice that you never asked a question. No where is there a question mark.

You were not asking a question but trying to hide the fact that you made a mistake. One of many you have made. That reduction of pollution caused the climate to warm.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26226
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>No surprise there the response was way beyond your comprehension abilities. Well any way I do have ideas and for you that would be a zero. See why youíre Less than a Box of Rocks?
And yet more than you.

Actually, have you ever considered how valuable a box of various types of rocks could be. If it is a box of diamonds, that box of rocks could be quite valuable. Or a box of moon rocks.

On the other hand I would have to wonder how you would rate vs dryer lint? I would be willing to bet that the dryer lint would be far more valuable. At least you can use the dryer lint to pack a delicate object for mailing.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26227
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Look in your post 26221. Notice that you never asked a question. No where is there a question mark.
You were not asking a question but trying to hide the fact that you made a mistake. One of many you have made. That reduction of pollution caused the climate to warm.
Do you advocate a return to Black Friday as in Los Angeles in 1949?
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26228
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet more than you.
Actually, have you ever considered how valuable a box of various types of rocks could be. If it is a box of diamonds, that box of rocks could be quite valuable. Or a box of moon rocks.
On the other hand I would have to wonder how you would rate vs dryer lint? I would be willing to bet that the dryer lint would be far more valuable. At least you can use the dryer lint to pack a delicate object for mailing.
Oh We agreed many many times that a box of rocks had value. Your issue is that youíre Less than a Box of Rocks. That equates to less than a zero a negative number living in a void. Well were not sure by your answers if you are actually alive or your answers are computer generated by -- well you tell us.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26231
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>They only thing you know about black Friday are that when the lights went out you were conceived. And that statement is a stretch you may have been hatched.
Black Friday=day after thanksgiving that is the biggest shopping day of the year. Of course that isn't what Patriot aka Bozo is taking about.

Also, when the Big Blackout of 1965 happened I was already in diapers. Not that where I lived was in the area blacked out.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26232
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Black Friday=day after thanksgiving that is the biggest shopping day of the year. Of course that isn't what Patriot aka Bozo is taking about.
Also, when the Big Blackout of 1965 happened I was already in diapers. Not that where I lived was in the area blacked out.
WOW just the other day you made a statement that no K level was offered when you started school. Gee K level started some 80+- years ago. There you have it folks the Less than a Box of Rocks at its best. How do you live with your----self being such a liar? Oh you still are in diapers that being around your lips due to all the crap the comes out of you.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26234
Dec 5, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

The only issue with smog is that the Less than a Box of Rocks AKA "tina" injested too much and destroyed the only livivng brain cell it at one time had. Well that could be a good thing for the children of the world the it scares by its Less than a Box of Rocks answers.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26235
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you advocate relinquishing the pollution laws???
The 1950's act was the first act from the government that made U.S. citizens and policy makers aware of this global problem. Unfortunately, this act did little to prevent air pollution, but it at least made government aware that this was a national problem.
So smog was not shown to cause tumors in mice. What does that have to do with the other ill effects from smog?
I advocate all things in moderation and none in excess and that includes all laws including your pollution laws.

As for the study with mice and smog. It was believed at the time that smog caused cancer. Also, consider that pollution in many places was already on the decline. Compare London for example. London of the 1950's had far cleaner air than just before WWI when the only pollution control was a smoke stack and coal soot fell like snow.

What happened in LA in the 50's is something that east coast cities had experienced a half century earlier and they also had to address how to deal with the tons of horse manure as well.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26236
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
I advocate all things in moderation and none in excess and that includes all laws including your pollution laws.
As for the study with mice and smog. It was believed at the time that smog caused cancer. Also, consider that pollution in many places was already on the decline. Compare London for example. London of the 1950's had far cleaner air than just before WWI when the only pollution control was a smoke stack and coal soot fell like snow.
What happened in LA in the 50's is something that east coast cities had experienced a half century earlier and they also had to address how to deal with the tons of horse manure as well.
Your education is in moderation and see what position it put you in. Yes Less than a Box of Rocks position.
christianity is EVIL

Halifax, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26237
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Expert: We must act fast on warming
Full story: Kansas.com
Droughts, melting ice caps and glaciers, rising sea levels and mass extinctions will all be a reality unless the U.S. and the world cut back on carbon emissions dramatically, said James Hansen, director of ...
/quote
expert eh?
reality is ;
the human race is growing about a billion more a year,so much for its extinction.lol
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26238
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Growing doesnít necessary mean extinction isn't at hand. Extinction could be a matter of minutes or years. Maybe youíre confused between religion and Christianity.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26239
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Growing necessarily means the opposite of extinction. You say our greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming and I say, "Bring it on!"
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26240
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Growing doesnít necessary mean extinction isn't at hand. Extinction could be a matter of minutes or years.Global warming,cooling, climate change, weather forecast and food supply. I could go on but that would only confuse you even more.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26241
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Without CO2 the earth would be an ice ball. Life as we know it would not have evolved. CO2 is necessary for life.

Almost two decades later from when climate change was deemed a hoax, the latest hard data on climate change was delivered at a congressional testimony on 12-02-2009, by John P. Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy Executive Office of the President of the United States. He stated that the primary cause of the observed changes in our environment are due to carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gasses produced by factories, vehicles, power plants, deforestation, etc. Over the past 50 years average air temperature in the United States had risen by more than 2``F, average rainfall increased by 5%, intervals between rainfall in dry regions had increased, there was a 600% increase in area burned by fires, there were more outbreaks of pests due to longer breeding seasons, there was an increase in number and severity of hurricanes, an average global water level increase of 8 inches over the last century. He points out that the 11 hottest years ever recoded occurred from 1997 onwards and that the rate of sea level rise in the past decade has doubled since the 20th century.

Perhaps mathematical models canít quite predict the details, but basic logic still works:
1. Greenhouse gasses make things hot; the more, the hotter.
2. We have been producing increasing amounts of greenhouse gasses.
3. Temperatures have been getting hotter (2 deg. Over the past 50 years). What happens when we add more greenhouse gasses?

Go back to sentence 1.
For those who follow that logic, reduction of greenhouse gasses emissions would at least stop heating things up, if not cool things down again.
http://www.examiner.com/article/climate-chang...
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26242
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
Without CO2 the earth would be an ice ball. Life as we know it would not have evolved. CO2 is necessary for life.
Almost two decades later from when climate change was deemed a hoax, the latest hard data on climate change was delivered at a congressional testimony on 12-02-2009, by John P. Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy Executive Office of the President of the United States. He stated that the primary cause of the observed changes in our environment are due to carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gasses produced by factories, vehicles, power plants, deforestation, etc. Over the past 50 years average air temperature in the United States had risen by more than 2``F, average rainfall increased by 5%, intervals between rainfall in dry regions had increased, there was a 600% increase in area burned by fires, there were more outbreaks of pests due to longer breeding seasons, there was an increase in number and severity of hurricanes, an average global water level increase of 8 inches over the last century. He points out that the 11 hottest years ever recoded occurred from 1997 onwards and that the rate of sea level rise in the past decade has doubled since the 20th century.
Perhaps mathematical models canít quite predict the details, but basic logic still works:
1. Greenhouse gasses make things hot; the more, the hotter.
2. We have been producing increasing amounts of greenhouse gasses.
3. Temperatures have been getting hotter (2 deg. Over the past 50 years). What happens when we add more greenhouse gasses?
Go back to sentence 1.
For those who follow that logic, reduction of greenhouse gasses emissions would at least stop heating things up, if not cool things down again.
http://www.examiner.com/article/climate-chang...
What BS.
Ever hear that a cold body can't heat up a warmer body?
When has this ever happened?
You warmers are clueless.
LOL
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26243
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

2

ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
What BS.
Ever hear that a cold body can't heat up a warmer body?
When has this ever happened?
You warmers are clueless.
LOL
OMIGOD, It's Gordo. He's alive!(though his brain is still dead..)
http://tinyurl.com/847wx2b

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26244
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
OMIGOD, It's Gordo. He's alive!(though his brain is still dead..)
http://tinyurl.com/847wx2b
A resurrection, or perhaps just an erection.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 25,361 - 25,380 of26,831
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••