Another sad article on our ocean's health...

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12908697#post12908697 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by marisol
Twz, I appreciate your post, and as a young person, it's your job to question everything. I will say this- there are a lot more scientists on the side of petroleum, plastics, chemical companies, who do not want their fertilizers, petroleum companies, to go out of business. The government does not profit from promoting the health of the reefs. The fertilizer run-off from corn production- who profits from that? Fertilizer/chemical companies- not the government. We- it will be at our expense- the public - to clean up after these polluters.

No private company- Exxon, Lilly, Edison, will protect the reefs- only joe-public- in threads like this, in poorly funded research projects and initiatives the Environmental Protection Agency tries to promote: http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/oceans/coral/#solutions Rather than knock the government's efforts- look at who has a lot to gain from breaking environmental laws, and who are fighting the regulations that protect our oceans.

Yeah, but look who profits from all of this "green legislation" promoting the use of ethanol, etc.; it's people like Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, and Tom Daschle who are invested up to their ears in these companies. Daschle, for example, sits on the boards of THREE ethanol companies!! I'm not making this stuff up, guys, you can easily verify ALL of this. If you people think that the criminals in our Imperial Congress are pushing green technologies down our throats with the motive of saving our world, you are sorely mistaken.

 

[flashyleopard]

Having the president invested in and owning oil companies that his wealth is built upon, while we are paying $4 a gallon while the the companies are claiming billions in profits is certainly not a problem...yeesh....get real folks.

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12910077#post12910077 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by flashyleopard
Having the president invested in and owning oil companies that his wealth is built upon, while we are paying $4 a gallon while the the companies are claiming billions in profits is certainly not a problem...yeesh....get real folks.

Please stop chiming in unless you actually have something substantial to contribute. 8.2% of that $4.00 actually ends up as profit for the oil companies; 32% of that $4.00 goes to the GOVERNMENT in the form of national and local taxes. That means that we pay the government FOUR TIMES the amount of money we pay "Big Oil" when we buy gas! If "Big Oil" is turning record profits, and our government makes QUADRUPLE what the oil companies make, how does that shake out? Who cares if Bush is invested in oil? Do you own an IRA or a 401K? If you do, then chances are 9.7/10 that YOU are invested in oil because the overwhelming majority of mutual funds in America are comprised in part by oil holdings. Please educate yourself before you throw in anymore misleading information to be picked up by people reading this who are "on the fence."

 

[aslavatortin]

Oh, by the way, it was Clinton who vetoed ANWAR and it is congress who has banned exploration and drilling in the US, so you can thank them for driving the price of oil (and the bank accounts of those invested in it) sky high! We have more crude oil and oil shale reserves under American soil than there is in ALL of the Middle East combined. If we were to announce that we are going to drill, it doesn't matter how long it would take us to actually get any of that oil out of the ground, prices would drop immediately! If the speculators knew that more supply was on its way to the market in the future, they would stop investing NOW, because it is the FUTURE they are speculating upon. Increased supply with constant demand leads to lower prices.

 

[greenbean36191]

Please educate yourself before you throw in anymore misleading information to be picked up by people reading this who are "on the fence."

Excellent advice all-around.

The planet is currently in a cooling cycle (thanks to the cycle of nature) but the global warming zealots get to say that it's due to their efforts - 20 years along the timeline of the planet (do the math).

No. There was one cool month, not a cooling cycle or even a trend. The trend for the last 10 years has been flat. Even cherry picking the data to start with the second hottest year on record doesn't create a cooling trend.

But as to global warming, this is a global cycle that is now only been seen due to the lack
of climate records tens of thousands of years ago.

What "reasonable facts" lead you to believe this?

what are "scientists" paid for and who pays them?
The government dose! (Well are tax payers do...)
And what dose the government want?
thats right power, how do you get power?
Money.
Now put yourself in there shoes, what's one great way to gain
wealth?
Lets pay these scientists to tell people there destroying the earth (which is a necessity to most people.)
so they will buy all these great "earth saving" Technologies
creating a VERY large market which will lead to a higher National wealth.

Oh, We already know are governments lie to us,
Why believe them now?

Again, there's not much reasonable or factual here. You're confusing scientists and the government. We are not one in the same and, no most of us do not get paid by the government. I think almost anyone working in the field would find the idea that we're colluding with the government extremely laughable. Most of us would tell you that we're trying to tell the government things they don't want to hear and they aren't listening.

In the case of this story, the report is by government scientists, but the data they're reporting is pretty tough to spin. You lay down transects, count what's there, and compare it to previous years. The numbers tell the story. Other privately funded scientists are doing the same work too, so it's hard to fudge the numbers without sending up red flags, especially at the biggest meeting of reef scientists.

 

[flashyleopard]

So it is a complete loss to utilize the government to fix the environmental damage we are doing, simply b/c all the governmental parties (according to you) are corrupt? That is why the American people need to make the demands and exercise the benefit of being part of a representative democracy, that is to make politicians listen by voting for what we want or better, what needs to be done, instead of who believes in the Christian code of ethics.
Like it or not, regardless of whether you value my opinions, I can post here as many times as I please and as far as I can tell, I've made far more sense than you, b/c first it was the democrats making money off of light bulbs, now it's big republicans pocketing all of the money we spend on oil( which I stated and you disagreeed with only to agree with, but then blamed Clinton for it)....well obviously we can just omit common law and let the US run itself: gangs, rapists, murderers, rebels, corporations, and the whole lot.Instead of spouting off about how the government is ruining the world, why not take some responsibility and make some alternative suggestions.I have at least provided viable solutions to what I perceive as problems.

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12911596#post12911596 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by flashyleopard
So it is a complete loss to utilize the government to fix the environmental damage we are doing, simply b/c all the governmental parties (according to you) are corrupt? That is why the American people need to make the demands and exercise the benefit of being part of a representative democracy, that is to make politicians listen by voting for what we want or better, what needs to be done, instead who believes in the Christian code of ethics.
Like it or not, regardless of whether you value my opinions, I can post here as many times as I please and as far as I can tell, I've made far more sense than you, b/c first it was the democrats making money off of light bulbs, now it's big republicans pocketing all of the money we spend on gas....well obviously we can just omit common law and let the US run itself, gangs, rapists, murderers, rebels, corporations, and the whole lot.Instead of spouting off about how the government is ruining the world, why not take some responsibility and make some alternative suggestions.I have at least provided viable solutions to what I perceive as problems.

Not once did i say its a complete loss for us to utilize the government for damage We have caused.

Though what i do believe is that they are trying to solve problems that are not there
you have to take into account many more things when dealing with Global warming and cooling cycles: atmospheric composition, changes in the Earth's orbit around the Sun known as Milankovitch cycles and some could argue the Sun's orbit around the galaxy, the motion of tectonic plates resulting in changes in location and amount of continental and oceanic crust on the Earth's surface, which could affect wind and ocean currents, variations in solar output, the orbital dynamics of the Earth-Moon system, and the impact of relatively large meteorites, and volcanism including eruptions of supervolcanoes.
Some of these factors are causally related to each other. Changes in Earth's atmospheric composition especially the concentrations of greenhouse gases may alter the climate, while climate change itself can change the atmospheric composition by changing the rate at which weathering removes CO2.

no most of us do not get paid by the government. I think almost anyone working in the field would find the idea that we're colluding with the government extremely laughable

I'm sorry, I guess google lies some times.

You're confusing scientists and the government.

No I am simply stating the government can "make"
Some things seem as they are not.
money can do some amazing things.

 

[FishNFun]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12911449#post12911449 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
[/B]No. There was one cool month, not a cooling cycle or even a trend. The trend for the last 10 years has been flat. Even cherry picking the data to start with the second hottest year on record doesn't create a cooling trend.
[/B]

Well, according to NASA, they're predicting that the current COOLING TREND will last about 30 years. I don't need to cherry pick because they've already said it.

Also, you conveniently glossed over the fact that any climate data used is woefully inadequate given that we humans have only been tracking it for a little over 100 years. Now if the earth is about 4.5 BILLION years old, the statistical validity of 100 years worth of data is beyond laughable. You can make any statistic appear scary if you choose an such an insanely miniscule sample. If you can truly look at this pathetic sampling of data and still come to the conclusion that the Earth is warming then I've got some magical carbon offset credits to sell you - so that I can spend $300 million dollars on an advertisign campaign to get you to buy more carbon offset credits aka The Al Gore swindle. Toodles!

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12911596#post12911596 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by flashyleopard
So it is a complete loss to utilize the government to fix the environmental damage we are doing, simply b/c all the governmental parties (according to you) are corrupt? That is why the American people need to make the demands and exercise the benefit of being part of a representative democracy, that is to make politicians listen by voting for what we want or better, what needs to be done, instead who believes in the Christian code of ethics.
Like it or not, regardless of whether you value my opinions, I can post here as many times as I please and as far as I can tell, I've made far more sense than you, b/c first it was the democrats making money off of light bulbs, now it's big republicans pocketing all of the money we spend on gas....well obviously we can just omit common law and let the US run itself, gangs, rapists, murderers, rebels, corporations, and the whole lot.Instead of spouting off about how the government is ruining the world, why not take some responsibility and make some alternative suggestions.I have at least provided viable solutions to what I perceive as problems.

Holy crap, do you pay attention? What "big republicans" are profiting from gas? I just listed a bunch of DEMOCRATS (like Daschle) who are heavily vested in ethanol!?! That is who (if anyone) is profiting unfairly from gas! I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about! The government isn't ruining the world, but people like you who go out and vote without weighing FACTS are ruining the world. What is this "according to you" nonsense? Every single thing I have said on here about any politician or party or whatever is easily verifiable through reliable sources (do you know how to google?).

This country was founded as a Constitutional Republic and we need to remember that. The US was established to END the tyranny of having a government dictate every aspect of our lives. If you want to live in a socialist state, please move to Europe! Before you do, I highly advise finding a good friend over there to tell you what it is like, because the US media paints an awfully happy picture. Take Denmark for example; according to yahoo, they have the "happiest" citizens in the world. Denmark has a combined marginal tax rate of 70%! We need another Reagan to come along and stop the spending NOW and drastically scale back the size of our government.

 

[flashyleopard]

There are lots of issues in regards to government spending that need to be examined. I for one am no fan of working to pay for those who don't care to.That is a seperate issue.When you starting mentioning the government profiting from oil, and since you previously mentioned the democrats profitiong from ethanol and light bulbls, I assumed you must be blaming the republicans in office for the oil profits...my mistake.

So I will agree with you...let's remove the government for the equation of how to clean up the mess we have made of the Earth and moved towards greener lives.How else will it be done and on a large enough scale?Volunteer programs won't cut it, new technologies aren't free and now we have no taxes and no one wants to pay for it.I want to hear what you suggest be done.Forget the political aspect of this whole argument, what has me riled is the denial that anything should be done at all or that there is even a problem.Since a complete overhaul of the government is unlikely, I simply suggested we utilize what we have in place, rather than adding another, ''what if'' factor.

In regards to my voting habits, how would you know who I voted for? I happen to be very split in regards to my political views and favor the candidate that agrees most with my views and opinions, I don't vote based on party designation.Democrats tax us and give hands out to people who don't deserve it, but they also have some merit under the premis of promoting equal rights and liberties and are gernerally regarded as being more procative in the efforts to clean up the environment.While they have yet to be successful, they also have are working towards better healthcare and education.What I like about republicans is they are less supportive of programs they reward freeloaders, and they have some sense of conviction for standing up to some moral injustices....however they often forget the aspect of seperation between church and state and try to have us all living under the Christian authority.These are just my opinions and you have your own.What started as a thread about reefs in need of rescue has turned into a politcal debate, that always gets people worked up.If you wish to continue this, I will respond only in the lounge, b/c political discussion has no bussiness here and I have already contributed too much to this off topic tanget.

 

[tolthoff]

Mods, please stop this nonsense! It is a huge waste of time to argue the "religion" of global warming. It is not scientific, based on facts, or even common sense.

 

[FishNFun]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12912454#post12912454 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tolthoff
Mods, please stop this nonsense! It is a huge waste of time to argue the "religion" of global warming. It is not scientific, based on facts, or even common sense.

Your statement couldn't be further from reality. Whether or not you choose to look up and verify for yourself what's been stated doesn't change the fact that actual facts and data have been presented. But you're right when you call it a religion because the global warming advocates are rushing headlong in to it based soley on FAITH - not facts.

 

[virginiadiver69]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12911449#post12911449 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
The trend for the last 10 years has been flat.

Really ?? :lol: So let me get this straight...there's been no warming for the past 10 years and warming is expected to be "taking a break" for the next 10-15 years? :rolleye1:
Oh...one more question, how do you get over the fact that EVERY single weather pattern and climate cycle that we will EVER go through has happened before...with or without us, HUH?
Face it...Willie Lowman has led you down the wrong path and and sadly, the agenda your so vested in is falling apart.

 

[aslavatortin]

As much as I would love to see this thread shut down and deleted, I must admit this isn't really "off topic." I want all of you "global warmers" to explain to me how it is you think that the size of my yard needs to be regulated and we all have to drive around in solar powered scooters in order to save the environment, yet EVERY ONE OF YOU (unless you explain otherwise) are, in one way or another, directly or indirectly, supporting a hobby that destroys our environment. If you buy a fish that was wild-caught, regardless of the method used, you are supporting the industry of taking fish from our reefs. When you buy wild corals, you support taking animals from the reef. When you buy a skimmer, you are responsible for x amount of greenhouse gasses that were released during its manufacture, as it is indeed a plastic (therefore petroleum, therefore OIL). Do you dose? Dow Chemical et al have done their fair share of polluting, I promise. What do you do with the wastewater/carbon after medicating your system? Flush it? Trash? Storm drains?

Guys, the fact of the matter is, if you were really as gung ho as you think you are about this environmentalism, you would lobby like hell to shut this hobby/industry down. So until you guys give up your systems, I don't want any of you to tell me not to water my lawn!

 

[burton14e7]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12911197#post12911197 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Oh, by the way, it was Clinton who vetoed ANWAR and it is congress who has banned exploration and drilling in the US, so you can thank them for driving the price of oil (and the bank accounts of those invested in it) sky high! We have more crude oil and oil shale reserves under American soil than there is in ALL of the Middle East combined. If we were to announce that we are going to drill, it doesn't matter how long it would take us to actually get any of that oil out of the ground, prices would drop immediately! If the speculators knew that more supply was on its way to the market in the future, they would stop investing NOW, because it is the FUTURE they are speculating upon. Increased supply with constant demand leads to lower prices.

Actually I read an article a couple weeks ago that stated that if we opened up American oil that by 2027 the price savings would be 3 cents on the gallon. I thought it sounded absurd so I asked my buddy with an economics degree from USC that works at BP(british petroleum) and he said because of the margins that's probably about accurate.

"A 2004 study by the government's Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that drilling in ANWR would trim the price of gas by 3.5 cents a gallon by 2027."

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1815884,00.html?imw=Y

The Texas investor dropping 2 Bil into wind farms makes me happy though. And although I agree that the earth has been going through swings for mili's of years that what we're doing isn't necessary un-natural...I wasn't living here for those past few bili years so I don't care if it's natural or not. I don't like it when it gets above 80 degree's and I turn on my AC, so I prefer that it didn't get hot and I'd like to assist in any way possible keeping it cool. Know what I'm saying?? Global warming is for the ladies, I want global cooling so I can chill outside when I want.

 

[aslavatortin]

I read your link and some of the numbers they are using are outdated (ie. no longer correct). They aren't taking into account any significant amounts of our offshore oil or the tremendous oil shale deposits in Colorado/Utah. The fact is HALF of the world's shale lies within 150 miles of Grand Junction, CO. Time/CNN have a long history of ignoring facts that don't jive with their agenda as well as "inventing" facts that do. I don't fault you for citing that article; I do think it's high time we institute something along the lines of "media malpractice."

 

[schulace123]

does anyone know when hydrogen cars will become avalible to more of the public? they are kinda cool once you learn alittle about them....

 

[burton14e7]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12913973#post12913973 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
I read your link and some of the numbers they are using are outdated (ie. no longer correct). They aren't taking into account any significant amounts of our offshore oil or the tremendous oil shale deposits in Colorado/Utah. The fact is HALF of the world's shale lies within 150 miles of Grand Junction, CO. Time/CNN have a long history of ignoring facts that don't jive with their agenda as well as "inventing" facts that do. I don't fault you for citing that article; I do think it's high time we institute something along the lines of "media malpractice."

Which numbers are out dated, links plz. I'm very interested as I ran it by somebody in the industry which I doubt any of us are. There's not much media that isn't going to be biased. I read that global media is ran by 7 conglomerates. I tend to read bbc news a lot too just because it's a non american view point but it's tends to be in line with cnn too. So it's not perfect but seems to be less biased.

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12914158#post12914158 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by schulace123
does anyone know when hydrogen cars will become avalible to more of the public? they are kinda cool once you learn alittle about them....

Ok, now we are getting somewhere! Good job, schulace, hydrogen technology is a great example of American ingenuity that involved no government subsidy or stipend to bring it about. This is phenomenal technology and it really doesn't get much greener than this (for now). Has anyone on here heard of a "hydro-booster" or "hydrogen-booster"? Google it, it is a modification on a standard car that I bet many of the DIY'ers on here would love to do. It will drastically improve fuel economy (some boast up to 50% or more) while simultaneously increasing horsepower and reducing emissions by supplementing your car's air intake with hydrogen gas that is produced by a DIY reactor. The technology is relatively easy to make using pretty available parts if you know your way around a car. This is the type of thing I was referring to when I said the American people DO perform at their best with as little interference from Uncle Sam as possible. I totally support government, don't misunderstand me, but I believe in limited government. I don't think anyone, no matter how "right-wing" they are, WANTS to destroy our planet. Most of us on the right are extremely avid outdoorsmen, we love conservation and we all participate in it, but we don't MANDATE it.

 

[burton14e7]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12915408#post12915408 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Ok, now we are getting somewhere! Good job, schulace, hydrogen technology is a great example of American ingenuity that involved no government subsidy or stipend to bring it about. This is phenomenal technology and it really doesn't get much greener than this (for now). Has anyone on here heard of a "hydro-booster" or "hydrogen-booster"? Google it, it is a modification on a standard car that I bet many of the DIY'ers on here would love to do. It will drastically improve fuel economy (some boast up to 50% or more) while simultaneously increasing horsepower and reducing emissions by supplementing your car's air intake with hydrogen gas that is produced by a DIY reactor. The technology is relatively easy to make using pretty available parts if you know your way around a car. This is the type of thing I was referring to when I said the American people DO perform at their best with as little interference from Uncle Sam as possible. I totally support government, don't misunderstand me, but I believe in limited government. I don't think anyone, no matter how "right-wing" they are, WANTS to destroy our planet. Most of us on the right are extremely avid outdoorsmen, we love conservation and we all participate in it, but we don't MANDATE it.

Nikola Tesla comes to mind when discussing alternative and possibly free energy we could have developed for...everything....that the government shut down.