Topic: This is not climate change
started by: Rosalind_Swenson
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 08 2012,9:03 am
Santorini, when I have talked about our land, water and air being poisoned, I'm not talking about climate change. That is an area I tried to keep us out of. I had given up on that debate long ago because of people like you. I let myself finally get sucked back into it with you after I realized how much more info there was on it since the last time I attempted. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways, I will not let it happen again. So, that said, back to my original line of talk on the actual poisoning of land, water and air. There are whole towns that are becoming dangerously toxic. Whole towns that have to have water shipped in to them because theirs is not safe. There are whole towns where the air and land are toxic and have obscene rates of lung problems, cancers, birth defects, many many more problems because of what is going on near those towns. I'm not going to give you any links, because it is clear to me exactly what that will lead to. So please do internet searches on:Dimock Pennsylvania water poisoned by fracking
Pavillion Wyoming water poisoned by fracking
Colstrip Montana poisoned by coal
The Berkley Pit of Montana
Libby Montana asbestos poisoning
Massey Energy Slurry Flood
West Anniston Creek chemical dumping
Tennessee Valley Authority Fossil Plant Kingston Tennessee 2008
There are many many manyyyyyyyy more instances of all of these problems all over the US. These are just a few.
Honestly I am not trying to depress anyone or scare the crap out of them. I'm trying to wake people up to the fact that our government works right with some of the biggest corporations, and if that doesn't stop, it's our kids and grandkids who will suffer most. And if we don't start changing some things, it is also our kids and grandkids who will pay the price. Sure we have alot of problems in government, and there are alot of things that need changing, I tend to focus on the environment type stuff. I was born a tree hugging eco-nut. Anyone who says the environmentalists are trying to destroy the economy better think again.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 08 2012,9:13 pm
QUOTE
Anyone who says the environmentalists are trying to destroy the economy better think again.
I don't know of anyone saying "the environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy." Do you? 
There are all kinds of wrongs done by all kinds of believers. Environmentalists have no hold on being correct--I would submit that as often as not, they end up being wrong. Remembere the Alar scare with apples? The scare that cranberries were somehow poisoned? The "snail darter" fiasco? The "spotted owl" that devestated western timber harvest (and was later found not to be a separate species)? The "Alaska pipeline will disrupt migrating caribou" lie? Is it any wonder that people find many environmental claims to be yet another case of "The sky is Falling!" hysteria?
Work in "environmentalism" does NOT have to mean "we're never going to allow change to happen."
And politicians throwing money at unworkable "green" programs just because you THINK it might work isn't the answer, either.
People disparage "Greed is good" in the movie--but it should be taken in full context--that people act in self-interest, and that can be GOOD. Example: Apple Computers--they didn't build that company just to make computers available, they did it to make money--and created entire industries and spin-offs employing hundreds of thousands of people.
If power companies thought that solar, wind, pond scum, or any other far-out technologies were viable, they would have invested in them. They didn't though, did they? The government did--and lost billions.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 08 2012,10:22 pm
jimhanson: I don't know of anyone saying "the environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy." Do you?------------------
Me: Um yeah. All the regulations and restrictions are their fault right? Making jobs go overseas? Making things more expensive?
---------------------------------------
As for the rest of your comment....what the hell are you talking about? If power companies thought alternatives were viable?? They want to keep control of it all so they keep getting money from us. If the focus was smaller homesized energy sources the power companies would be left out. I honestly don't know how anyone wants to keep heading down the road we are on. Especially when we DO have alternatives that DO work. Each of us would have to be alot more frugal with how they use their energy for sure, but so what. We as individuals would have to do alot of changing, but so what. Are we that selfish that we can't look critically at exactly what we are doing and make things right? How can you honestly check into those places I mentioned and ....goodgod why am I even trying to discuss anything with you.
Posted by alcitizens on Mar. 09 2012,12:27 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Mar. 08 2012,10:22 pm)
QUOTE
what the hell are you talking about?
Thats why I use to call him The Mumbler 
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 09 2012,11:54 am
QUOTE
jimhanson: I don't know of anyone saying "the environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy." Do you?
------------------
Me: Um yeah. All the regulations and restrictions are their fault right? Making jobs go overseas? Making things more expensive?
------------------
Me: Um yeah. All the regulations and restrictions are their fault right? Making jobs go overseas? Making things more expensive?
I'll ask AGAIN--WHO is saying "Environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy?"
Since you brought it up, though, Is there any question that the increased regulations and regulatory costs drive business overseas? You don't see a lot of overseas companies relocating HERE to save regulatory costs!
QUOTE
If power companies thought alternatives were viable?? They want to keep control of it all so they keep getting money from us.
Again, where is your evidence that "they want to keep control so they keep getting money from us"?Don't you think that these companies would automatically select solar or wind power if it were cheaper and more efficient than the power they are producing from other sources? That's the way the world works. Despite all of the libbie wishful thinking, and 100 BILLION of OUR dollars, it hasn't worked here, or anywhere else in the world without even MORE tax subsidies. Failure of a program has never kept a libbie from insisting that we keep trying it over and over, though.
That's the problem with libbie "thinking"--they seem to believe that they can make things more efficient by simply MANDATING them!
I'll file your claim that they are keeping for themselves alongside the nutcases that opine that "someone invented a carburetor that runs on water, but Detroit bought up the patent so it can't be used"
OR
"___company wanted to come to Albert Lea, but "they" kept them out."
Kind of like the foolish King commanding the ocean waves to stop--just because he SAID so.
QUOTE
If the focus was smaller homesized energy sources the power companies would be left out.
Have YOU bought a wind or solar unit yet? If not, WHY NOT? Might it be that THE PRODUCT THEY PRODUCE ISN'T COMPETITIVELY PRICED? If you believe the process has a future, why don't you invest every cent you can get your hands on in one of the companies? After all, the stock is pretty cheap now, what with all of the bankruptcies of failed Obama0subsidized companies!
QUOTE
goodgod why am I even trying to discuss anything with you.
That's OK, Rosalind. Get your facts together, and try again after you think things through. In the meantime, get a "group hug" from OTHER "true believers." 
Posted by grassman on Mar. 09 2012,11:58 am
It's all about money.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 09 2012,12:37 pm
Leave it to the libbies to trumpet recent events as "proof" of LONG TERM CLIMATE CHANGE. Tell us, what temperature is the earth "supposed" to be?
The temperature of the ice age 10,000 years ago? The temperature in the Middle Ages? I especially enjoyed the picture of Owlgore showing that the retreating glacier had exposed evidence of Viking habitation in Greenland 1000 years ago. Left unanswered is--"The land in Greenland must have been much WARMER then, 1000 years ago!" How about the temperature in 1900--before all of these awful automobiles and other internal combustion engines? If THIS is your measure, how much has the earth warmed? Answer--after correcting the discredited "hockey stick graph" that OwlGore used--7/10 of a degree.
If the earth was indeed consistently warming, and it is MAN-CAUSED--why are record COLDS being recorded--like this VERY SAME YEAR in Europe?
Have you forgotten that the earth has COOLED for the last 13 years?
Locally, have you forgotten the winters of the last 3 years?
7/10 of one degree globally. Scientists look for other errors. One possible error is that there used to be a lot more weather stations in the world keeping records than there are now--and they relied on someone looking at a mercury thermometer. Today, we have fewer weather stations, and they tend to be electronic--much more accurate.
Weather stations USED to be located outside the metropolitan areas. Today, they are usually located on airports. Not only are airports now surrounded by metropolitan areas and their associated "heat shields" (ever notice that temperatures in the metro areas are colder than rural areas?) but they are also located in the middle of a thousand acres of airport pavement. Do you suppose that has anything to do with the results?
To combat this, extremely precise satellite observations over the oceans are made--their results show even SMALLER deviations than the 7/10 of 1 %.
Of course, if there is no "problem", Big-Government hypers can't offer their SOLUTIONS--and no money for "research" or "AlGore."
Is it any wonder that they have ginned up the "sky-is-falling" alarmists?
Posted by Liberal on Mar. 09 2012,6:33 pm
QUOTE
Leave it to the libbies to trumpet recent events as "proof" of LONG TERM CLIMATE CHANGE.
I'm with you on this, only a complete and total moron would confuse short term weather changes with climate change.
QUOTE
Have you forgotten that the earth has COOLED for the last 13 years?
How about a link?
QUOTE
Locally, have you forgotten the winters of the last 3 years?
Like I said, "Only a complete and total moron would confuse short term weather changes with climate change".
Posted by irisheyes on Mar. 09 2012,10:43 pm
(jimhanson @ Mar. 08 2012,9:13 pm)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Anyone who says the environmentalists are trying to destroy the economy better think again.
I don't know of anyone saying "the environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy." Do you? Jim-
QUOTE
I'll ask AGAIN--WHO is saying "Environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy?
Not to pick on Self-Banished, but this post was made only a day before Rosalind started this topic.
QUOTE
What I'm trying to say Roz is hat there is so much info out there on both sides that it would be senseless to ruin our economy over a "theory.
So obviously there are some who believe or even talk about it "ruining our economy". And it's understandable to worry about both sides of the issue: the economy and the environment when talking about this topic.
QUOTE
Since you brought it up, though, Is there any question that the increased regulations and regulatory costs drive business overseas? You don't see a lot of overseas companies relocating HERE to save regulatory costs!
No, the idea that they move overseas so they can pay their workers a dollar an hour or have children working in sweatshops is a bigger indicator. You think big companies are scared of regulators, I'd say it's the other way around considering the big companies own the politicians that oversee those agencies.
The CEO of Gallup recently did a Q&A at the Governors Association meeting. It was interesting he kept bringing up how businesses kept claiming how scared they were of regulations, but when asked they can't really think of what regulations they're concerned about. It's usually the GOP, FOX, Rush, or Breitbart (I'm being redundant here) telling them what to think. When asked they have to wait until FOX tells them the answer of what specific regulations.
One only has to watch C-SPAN coverage briefly to see how often repubs and business owners want government HELP to cut taxes, increase subsidies, or start new regulations that will help their bottom line. Only for the same people to then complain about how complicated and lengthy the tax code is after they get their new credits and loopholes.
Even locally you always hear many businesses, farmers, and politicians talk about the need for MORE regulations regarding ethanol use. I was reading the paper a while ago where someone from the ethanol industry wanted new blender pumps, naturally the answer was: government regulations. So no, I gave up believing that businesses don't like regulations. They LOVE the ones that make money for them and decrease their tax burden. If it increases their operating costs instead, they'll claim it's socialist, communist, or tell you that's what the Nazis did.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 10 2012,12:10 pm
Self-Banished says QUOTE
What I'm trying to say Roz is hat there is so much info out there on both sides that it would be senseless to ruin our economy over a "theory.
and from that Rosalind and Irish translate that into "liberal-speak" as QUOTE
Anyone who says the environmentalists are trying to destroy the economy better think again.
One more time--I don't know anybody that has made that claim--SB was only saying that many of the "environmentalist" claims are only theoretical. "Environmentalists" don't exactly have a good record on their "Sky-is-falling" hysteria. Jim--
QUOTE
Since you brought it up, though, Is there any question that the increased regulations and regulatory costs drive business overseas? You don't see a lot of overseas companies relocating HERE to save regulatory costs!
Irish--
QUOTE
No, the idea that they move overseas so they can pay their workers a dollar an hour or have children working in sweatshops is a bigger indicator.
Yes--wages are lower in other countries--but so is their cost of living. Wages are only PART of the difference, though--and not as much as most libbies would make them out to be. A few weeks ago on Cavuto, a guest explained (Paraphrase) "Yes, it is an average of 40% cheaper to manufacture overseas--but the labor savings are only 20%. If you backed out the labor difference ENTIRELY, it is still 20% cheaper to manufacture overseas due to the cost of doing business in the U.S."
Here's the link to his book. < My Webpage > Note the title of the book--and the subtitle--"How the left created the outsourcing crisis, and how we can fix it."
Knowing the hatred libbies have for Fox news, I backed up the claim. null< My Webpage >
QUOTE
Labor costs are typically about 30% of total costs, for products produced in the U.S. Thus, labor savings on their face can save a manufacturer 24-26% of total production cost in China, and about 12-14% of total production cost in Mexico. But labor costs are not the entire issue! The manufacturer still has to get the product to market, reliably over the entire product life cycle.
I'd say those numbers corroborated the initial claim.
It's a horrible indictment of our system, when you can produce goods overseas, put up with foreign language and practice problems, bring them halfway around the world, and STILL be cheaper than our bloated system here at home. Even giving away the 20% savings in labor, our cost of doing business is still 20% higher due to taxes, regulation, insurance, and the resultant legal fees.
As for me--I'm going to visit the Euroweenies in France, Germany, and Austria(again). I'll re-visit Normandy, the Somme, Verdun, Bastogne, the Rhine, Nuremburg, Munich, Dachau, and Berchtesgarten--all places where Americans saved the Europeans from themselves. The Europeans are giving a great example of how NOT to do Socialism (Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) if only the Obamunists would learn the lesson.
The Obamunists want to drag us down to the European level--big government, low productivity, small military, high taxes, socialized medicine, tiny apartments, tiny cars, sky-high fuel prices. No wonder the Europeans spend so much time eating and drinking well--it's the cheapest entertainment they have left!
We call our group the "Bottomfeeders" because we travel cheap--meaning that we have to go in October, November, or March. Our goal has always been $1000 for air and hotel for 9 days"--and we have been able to do that until now (the Euro's have instituted their version of "Cap and Trade"--increasing air travel costs). The rooms are still cheap, though, and most of them are pretty nice. Eating and drinking costs have actually gone DOWN in the last 3 years due to the worldwide recession (how did George Bush get a recession started in THOSE countries?)
so we ameliorate the higher airfares by spreading them out over more days. We should still be able to do the air, hotel, trains, car, gas, musems, moderate food (we will splurge for a couple of special meals, I'm sure) for about $100 a day--hard to do that in the U.S.!I love visiting Europe, but I love coming back home even more. I'll be back in the office by April 1.
Posted by alcitizens on Mar. 10 2012,1:51 pm
We should go back to no Environmental Protection like China has now.. See more pictures here:
< https://www.google.com/search?...bih=894 >
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 10 2012,3:02 pm
Nice alcitizen!Can you say forced perspective photography?
How about motion and blur photography?
I think gore and his photographers did it really well in his docudrama!
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 10 2012,4:44 pm
Ah bells bells Alky let's just go back to the days of horse and buggy and sing a round of kumbyyah
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 10 2012,7:44 pm
(Self-Banished @ Mar. 10 2012,4:44 pm)
QUOTE
Ah bells bells Alky let's just go back to the days of horse and buggy and sing a round of kumbyyah
Kumbaya...now I havent heard that since camp! Those were the days. Less stress, age of innocence, people actually talked to one another face to face, and people had a general respect for their fellow human being as well as for themselves.
Then...we get generation X then Y now Z...and my how things have deteriorated.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 10 2012,9:38 pm
(Santorini @ Mar. 10 2012,7:44 pm)
QUOTE
Kumbaya...now I havent heard that since camp! Those were the days.
Was that band camp? Flute maybe?
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 10 2012,9:45 pm
^and this one time, at band camp... 
Posted by hymiebravo on Mar. 11 2012,9:17 am
QUOTE
I love visiting Europe, but I love coming back home even more. I'll be back in the office by April 1.
Just when things where starting to get lively, and heat up a bit, around here too.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 11 2012,2:39 pm
QUOTE
Just when things where starting to get lively, and heat up a bit, around here too.
I'll take partial credit for that--always fun to poke the libbies with a stick to stir the pot! Living amongst the Euroweenie Libbie tribe again should be instructive. It is interesting to see the effect of their mistakes--it always makes me feel good about coming back to the U.S.--and always fills me with more resolve to NOT let those same misguided policies happen here!
It would be good if some of our Congresscritters did the same, so they could see the actual effects of Socialist policies.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 12 2012,4:58 am
(jimhanson @ Mar. 09 2012,11:54 am)
QUOTE
QUOTE
jimhanson: I don't know of anyone saying "the environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy." Do you?
------------------
Me: Um yeah. All the regulations and restrictions are their fault right? Making jobs go overseas? Making things more expensive?
------------------
Me: Um yeah. All the regulations and restrictions are their fault right? Making jobs go overseas? Making things more expensive?
I'll ask AGAIN--WHO is saying "Environmentalists are TRYING to destroy the economy?"
Since you brought it up, though, Is there any question that the increased regulations and regulatory costs drive business overseas? You don't see a lot of overseas companies relocating HERE to save regulatory costs!
QUOTE
If power companies thought alternatives were viable?? They want to keep control of it all so they keep getting money from us.
Again, where is your evidence that "they want to keep control so they keep getting money from us"?Don't you think that these companies would automatically select solar or wind power if it were cheaper and more efficient than the power they are producing from other sources? That's the way the world works. Despite all of the libbie wishful thinking, and 100 BILLION of OUR dollars, it hasn't worked here, or anywhere else in the world without even MORE tax subsidies. Failure of a program has never kept a libbie from insisting that we keep trying it over and over, though.
That's the problem with libbie "thinking"--they seem to believe that they can make things more efficient by simply MANDATING them!
I'll file your claim that they are keeping for themselves alongside the nutcases that opine that "someone invented a carburetor that runs on water, but Detroit bought up the patent so it can't be used"
OR
"___company wanted to come to Albert Lea, but "they" kept them out."
Kind of like the foolish King commanding the ocean waves to stop--just because he SAID so.
QUOTE
If the focus was smaller homesized energy sources the power companies would be left out.
Have YOU bought a wind or solar unit yet? If not, WHY NOT? Might it be that THE PRODUCT THEY PRODUCE ISN'T COMPETITIVELY PRICED? If you believe the process has a future, why don't you invest every cent you can get your hands on in one of the companies? After all, the stock is pretty cheap now, what with all of the bankruptcies of failed Obama0subsidized companies!
QUOTE
goodgod why am I even trying to discuss anything with you.
That's OK, Rosalind. Get your facts together, and try again after you think things through. In the meantime, get a "group hug" from OTHER "true believers." QUOTE
If power companies thought alternatives were viable?? They want to keep control of it all so they keep getting money from us.
Again, where is your evidence that "they want to keep control so they keep getting money from us"?------------
If we all had the opportunity to go "off the grid" with our own sources of energy, the big energy companies wouldn't get any more money from us. Right?
--------------------------
Jim: Have YOU bought a wind or solar unit yet? If not, WHY NOT? Might it be that THE PRODUCT THEY PRODUCE ISN'T COMPETITIVELY PRICED?
Me: Damn Straight.
--------------------------
Now, two new power plants are going to be built in Georgia. Almost all of our 100+ nuclear power plants are getting close to their end. Why aren't we putting the billions and billions of dollars all of this is costing and putting some of that money into R and D, and also working on implementing things we already DO know work?
------------------
jimhanson:That's OK, Rosalind. Get your facts together, and try again after you think things through. In the meantime, get a "group hug" from OTHER "true believers."
-------
My facts together?? You haven't said one word about my facts. That list of towns and disasters? That's just a tiny fraction of my facts.
Posted by alcitizens on Jan. 30 2015,4:52 am
This stunning new video from NASA shows how air pollution from Asia changes weather and climate around the world. < View on YouTube >
Posted by Self-Banished on Jan. 30 2015,5:07 am
^yes and if a butterfly farts in South America...
Posted by alcitizens on Jan. 30 2015,1:08 pm
I don't know about butterfly farts but I do know that bee's are in decline..Declining Bee Populations Pose A Threat to Global Agriculture
< http://e360.yale.edu/feature...645 >
Posted by Botto 82 on Jan. 30 2015,1:46 pm
The sort of leaders we need now are not those who promise ultimate victory over Nature through perseverance in living as we do right now, but those with the courage and intelligence to present to the world what appears to be Nature's stern but reasonable surrender terms:1. Reduce and stabilize your population.
2. Stop poisoning the air, the water, and the topsoil.
3. Stop preparing for war and start dealing with your real problems.
4. Teach your kids, and yourselves, too, while you're at it, how to inhabit a small planet without helping to kill it.
5. Stop thinking science can fix anything if you give it a trillion dollars.
6. Stop thinking your grandchildren will be OK no matter how wasteful or destructive you may be, since they can go to a nice new planet on a spaceship. That is really mean, and stupid.
7. And so on. Or else.
- Kurt Vonnegut
Posted by MADDOG on Jan. 30 2015,4:27 pm
(alcitizens @ Jan. 30 2015,1:08 pm)
QUOTE
I don't know about butterfly farts
< The Butterfly Effect >
Now you know.
Posted by alcitizens on Jan. 30 2015,10:38 pm
(MADDOG @ Jan. 30 2015,4:27 pm)
QUOTE
(alcitizens @ Jan. 30 2015,1:08 pm)
QUOTE
I don't know about butterfly farts
< The Butterfly Effect >
Now you know.
Well that used up about 10 minutes of my life that I'll never get back..
I guess this is where I'm suppose to thank you..
Fart was never mentioned..
Posted by Self-Banished on Jan. 31 2015,6:45 am
Jeezus! I love it when he's stupid!
Posted by Botto 82 on Jan. 31 2015,8:55 am
(Self-Banished @ Jan. 31 2015,6:45 am)
QUOTE
Jeezus! I love it when he's stupid!
Never-ending happiness, then?
Posted by MADDOG on Jan. 31 2015,9:55 am
(alcitizens @ Jan. 30 2015,10:38 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ Jan. 30 2015,4:27 pm)
QUOTE
(alcitizens @ Jan. 30 2015,1:08 pm)
QUOTE
I don't know about butterfly farts
< The Butterfly Effect >
Now you know.
Well that used up about 10 minutes of my life that I'll never get back..
I guess this is where I'm suppose to thank you..
Fart was never mentioned..
I didn't think you'd read much past the part where he stated:
QUOTE
This is sometimes referred to as the butterfly effect, e.g. a butterfly flapping its wings in South America can affect the weather in Central Park.
Anyway, I'll be releasing butterflies today in hopes the snow stays off your driveway tonight.
In advance of your 'thank you', you're welcome.
Posted by Self-Banished on Jan. 31 2015,10:55 am
(Botto 82 @ Jan. 31 2015,8:55 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Jan. 31 2015,6:45 am)
QUOTE
Jeezus! I love it when he's stupid!
Never-ending happiness, then?
Pretty much,
Here let's be nice and post a pic of one of his idols...
Posted by alcitizens on Jan. 31 2015,11:29 am
QUOTE
Anyway, I'll be releasing butterflies today in hopes the snow stays off your driveway tonight.
In advance of your 'thank you', you're welcome.
In advance of your 'thank you', you're welcome.
I gradually built up speed as I skimmed through it looking for a farting butterfly..
Thanks for nothing..
Posted by stardust14 on Feb. 04 2015,1:46 am
Rosalind, your detractors were successfull once more in avoiding the topic. Only one comment (Botto) mentions anything about environmental degradation. Topic degradation, devolving to farts. Is this 2nd or 3rd grade. But then the complicit are wary in defending their questionable behavior towards earth.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 04 2015,1:50 pm
(Botto 82 @ Jan. 30 2015,1:46 pm)
QUOTE
The sort of leaders we need now are not those who promise ultimate victory over Nature through perseverance in living as we do right now, but those with the courage and intelligence to present to the world what appears to be Nature's stern but reasonable surrender terms:
1. Reduce and stabilize your population.
2. Stop poisoning the air, the water, and the topsoil.
3. Stop preparing for war and start dealing with your real problems.
4. Teach your kids, and yourselves, too, while you're at it, how to inhabit a small planet without helping to kill it.
5. Stop thinking science can fix anything if you give it a trillion dollars.
6. Stop thinking your grandchildren will be OK no matter how wasteful or destructive you may be, since they can go to a nice new planet on a spaceship. That is really mean, and stupid.
7. And so on. Or else.
- Kurt Vonnegut
1. Reduce and stabilize your population.
2. Stop poisoning the air, the water, and the topsoil.
3. Stop preparing for war and start dealing with your real problems.
4. Teach your kids, and yourselves, too, while you're at it, how to inhabit a small planet without helping to kill it.
5. Stop thinking science can fix anything if you give it a trillion dollars.
6. Stop thinking your grandchildren will be OK no matter how wasteful or destructive you may be, since they can go to a nice new planet on a spaceship. That is really mean, and stupid.
7. And so on. Or else.
- Kurt Vonnegut
Stardust:
QUOTE
Rosalind, your detractors were successfull once more in avoiding the topic. Only one comment (Botto) mentions anything about environmental degradation. Topic degradation, devolving to farts. Is this 2nd or 3rd grade. But then the complicit are wary in defending their questionable behavior towards earth.
Too often people would rather avoid uncomfortable and frightening things.
It's depressing. Who wants to be depressed? It's much more cheerful to think that things can just keep going the way they always have and that there's nothing to think or worry about.That's my take on things anyway.
Good to see you again Stardust. I hope you are well.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 05 2015,10:28 am
Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 12:28 PM PDT.3 billion gallons of oil industry wastewater has been injected illegally into California Aquifers
by Walter Einenkel
From the Center for Biological Diversity comes some troubling news:
Almost 3 billion gallons of oil industry wastewater have been illegally dumped into central California aquifers that supply drinking water and farming irrigation, according to state documents obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity. The wastewater entered the aquifers through at least nine injection disposal wells used by the oil industry to dispose of waste contaminated with fracking fluids and other pollutants.
High levels of arsenic, thallium and nitrates were also found in water-supply wells around waste-disposal locations. These, of course, have yet to be tested to find out the true nature of their relationship to the waste-management facilities nearby.
The state’s Water Board confirmed beyond doubt that at least nine wastewater disposal wells have been injecting waste into aquifers that contain high-quality water that is supposed to be protected under federal and state law.
Thallium is an extremely toxic chemical commonly used in rat poison. Arsenic is a toxic chemical that can cause cancer. Some studies show that even low-level exposure to arsenic in drinking water can compromise the immune system’s ability to fight illness.
“Arsenic and thallium are extremely dangerous chemicals,” said Timothy Krantz, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Redlands. “The fact that high concentrations are showing up in multiple water wells close to wastewater injection sites raises major concerns about the health and safety of nearby residents.”
Let's see, how much of our vegetables, dairy, meat etc. comes from this area?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 05 2015,4:39 pm
Egads, 3 billion. I wonder how much more there is that nobody is aware of?Then there's this, I haven't found any estimate of how much was LEGALLY dumped.
QUOTE
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — Regulators in California, the country's third-largest oil-producing state, have authorized oil companies to inject production fluids and waste into what are now federally protected aquifers more than 2,500 times, risking contamination of underground water supplies that could be used for drinking water or irrigation, state records show.
< http://www.startribune.com/politic...e=1&c=y >
Posted by hymiebravo on Feb. 05 2015,7:47 pm
Good old Paso Robles. . .
Posted by stardust14 on Feb. 05 2015,11:54 pm
1.The Mississippi River carries an estimated 1.5 million metric tons of nitrogen pollution into the Gulf of Mexico each year, creating a “dead zone” in the Gulf each summer about the size of New Jersey.2.Approximately 46% of the lakes in America are too polluted for fishing, aquatic life, or swimming.
3.In the United States, people use over 1.8 billion disposable diapers, 220 million tires, and 30 billion foam cups per year.
4.Each year 1.2 trillion gallons of untreated sewage, storm water, and industrial waste are dumped into U.S. waters.
5.Factories in the United States discharge approximately 3 million tons of toxic chemicals into the water, air, and land annually.
6.Over 80% of items buried in landfills could have been recycled instead.
7.Today, there are between 300 and 500 chemicals in the average person’s body that were not found in anyone’s body before 1920. Each year there are thousands of new chemicals sold or used in new products. There are more than 75,000 synthetic chemicals on the market today.
MPR is running a week long program on climate. The daily radio debate has roused the deniers from their cushy lifestyles like bark beetles in a forest fire. An example of a denier comment found on the MPR FB page:
"Who keeps pushing this stuff? Most of the West Coast's pollution comes from China due to the prevailing winds! In addition, 25% of the methane produced comes from cows!"
This babbling garbage is priceless!!...if that makes any sense.
Many, including myself, see the climate debate as a distraction from conservation, environmentalism, practical solutions. The deniers/polluters prefer continued pillage as decades of debate roll on. From a materialistic one-dimensional viewpoint stalling makes sense.
Polluters of the world(including those in this county) embrace science in relation to their profits and power; but then reject science when sacrifice and prudence is required.
The "exceptionalists" place themselves as earth's executives, capable of anything...EXCEPT modifying climate. Community understands human possibiltiy along with our limits, willing to employ ALL within its boundaries(including nature) to solve problems.
Earth will be fine. But our species may be the first to claim the unenviable title of "Extinction Through Suicide".
Peace out, Rosalind.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 06 2015,10:03 am
Amen Stardust.Costs of doing business? Capitalism, free market, living the lifestyle we've grown accustomed to?
Whenever I watch movies where Earth is attacked by alien invaders who come to drain our natural resources and kill us all (like Independence Day and several others) I'm in a quandary over which side to root for.
Posted by stardust14 on Feb. 06 2015,10:45 am
It's not all gloom and doom. It's just after so many years of waiting for "the big change" it has yet to happen. As was said in "The Day the Earth Stood Still" humans refuse to change until pushed to the edge. But will we see the edge? Speaking of sci-fi have you or anyone seen the new space flic "Interstellar"? Wondering if it was worth watching. Love good sci-fi.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 06 2015,1:35 pm
(stardust14 @ Feb. 06 2015,10:45 am)
QUOTE
It's not all gloom and doom. It's just after so many years of waiting for "the big change" it has yet to happen. As was said in "The Day the Earth Stood Still" humans refuse to change until pushed to the edge. But will we see the edge?
Speaking of sci-fi have you or anyone seen the new space flic "Interstellar"? Wondering if it was worth watching. Love good sci-fi.
Speaking of sci-fi have you or anyone seen the new space flic "Interstellar"? Wondering if it was worth watching. Love good sci-fi.
No, it's not all gloom and doom, and I don't think it's too late either.
I think for anything to change though, priorities would need to be changed. I think if more Americans actually knew how bad things have gotten, they would be questioning the way things are. But since the media doesn't talk much about anything of importance like this and the politicians talk even less about it
I think that even most people who do realize that things can't keep going as they are, feel powerless to do anything about it, or decide "oh well, might as well enjoy the ride while it lasts".
I had tried fruitlessly to get my father and step mom to recycle. When they finally gave the excuse that they didn't have the room to spare for setting up recycling, I volunteered to set up an area by myself and that it wouldn't be in their way at all. My step-ma kinda freaked on me and said "In the bible it says this Earth shall pass away. It's been foretold by the word of God, and that's good enough for me."
How does someone argue with that logic?
But I really do think if the mainstream media gave a lot more air time to problems like these, (and solutions), that big changes could and would happen.
We haven't seen Interstellar, but hopefully will be renting it soon. It looks pretty good.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 06 2015,7:02 pm
hand·wring·ingˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 06 2015,10:03 pm
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 06 2015,7:02 pm)
QUOTE
hand·wring·ing
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
Not much hand-wringing. A lot of head shaking though.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 07 2015,7:28 am
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 06 2015,7:02 pm)
QUOTE
hand·wring·ing
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 07 2015,3:43 pm
(grassman @ Feb. 07 2015,7:28 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 06 2015,7:02 pm)
QUOTE
hand·wring·ing
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
There's nothing smartass about it,this is nothing more than handwringing over a subject that's an attempt at social engineering.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 08 2015,2:46 pm
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 07 2015,3:43 pm)
QUOTE
(grassman @ Feb. 07 2015,7:28 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 06 2015,7:02 pm)
QUOTE
hand·wring·ing
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
ˈhandˌriNGiNG/
noun
noun: hand-wringing
the clasping together and squeezing of one's hands, especially when distressed or worried.
an excessive display of concern or distress.
"his customary handwringing about the need for more local aid"
Translate hand wringing to
Translations, word origin, and more definitions
There's nothing smartass about it,this is nothing more than handwringing over a subject that's an attempt at social engineering.
It's a subject of utmost importance however. We do not have an infinite amount of fresh water. We are depleting our sources of water at an alarming rate. Our methods of farming and extractions of fossil fuels are not sustainable. Our uses and dumping of toxins are not sustainable. We're running out of water and all of our pollinators are dying out.
It's not hype, it's not scare-mongering. It's the truth. Even if our environmental problems consisted of just those two things, some very big changes need to happen.
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 09 2015,8:31 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Feb. 08 2015,2:46 pm)
QUOTE
We do not have an infinite amount of fresh water. We are depleting our sources of water at an alarming rate. Our methods of farming and extractions of fossil fuels are not sustainable.
No-one gives a frak. No one here, anyway. It's a problem we are gleefully kicking down the road, because all of us will be dead before the implied chickens come home to roost.
Unless reincarnation is real. Then we're all frakked.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 09 2015,11:55 am
(Botto 82 @ Feb. 09 2015,8:31 am)
QUOTE
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Feb. 08 2015,2:46 pm)
QUOTE
We do not have an infinite amount of fresh water. We are depleting our sources of water at an alarming rate. Our methods of farming and extractions of fossil fuels are not sustainable.
No-one gives a frak. No one here, anyway. It's a problem we are gleefully kicking down the road, because all of us will be dead before the implied chickens come home to roost.
Unless reincarnation is real. Then we're all frakked.
I don't understand the mentality of doing nothing. I really don't.
I think most of us will still be alive when our chickens come home to roost. Even if we were to escape the worst of it, I don't understand why anyone would want to kick the problem down the road to make things worse for our children and grandchildren.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 09 2015,12:42 pm
I predict 20-30 years from now we'll still be wringing our hands over this BS.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 09 2015,1:51 pm
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 09 2015,12:42 pm)
QUOTE
I predict 20-30 years from now we'll still be wringing our hands over this BS.
Food prices have already been rising. Fewer ranchers are raising cattle. Cargill even had to close a plant in Texas. No idea if any other companies have been closing due to water shortages. Water supplies are shrinking while water demand keeps growing every year.
Pictures of the Colorado River:
< https://www.google.com/search?...CB0QsAQ >
Pictures of Lake Mead:
< https://www.google.com/search?...CB0QsAQ >
A couple communities actually out of water now:
< http://www.latimes.com/local...#page=1 >
< https://stateimpact.npr.org/texas...ying-up >
< http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014...60-days >
< http://www.pbs.org/newshou...r_03-20 >
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 09 2015,2:18 pm
Beef ranchers sold down their herds because we had $7 plus corn for quite awhile because of an even bigger scam, ethonol.
Posted by alcitizens on Feb. 09 2015,2:22 pm
(Botto 82 @ Feb. 09 2015,8:31 am)
QUOTE
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Feb. 08 2015,2:46 pm)
QUOTE
We do not have an infinite amount of fresh water. We are depleting our sources of water at an alarming rate. Our methods of farming and extractions of fossil fuels are not sustainable.
No-one gives a frak. No one here, anyway. It's a problem we are gleefully kicking down the road, because all of us will be dead before the implied chickens come home to roost.
Unless reincarnation is real. Then we're all frakked.
< View on YouTube >
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 09 2015,4:12 pm
Things going to magically get better ya think? Believe it or not, I don't like talking about depressing things, but I don't see that sticking our heads up our butts is a viable option on many things. Water shortages are already affecting us. The historic water crisis has been rough on dairies, driving up the cost of feed and water. Consumers are seeing the effects at the grocery store.
...
California farmers and ranchers paid 12.4% more for feed in 2013 than 2012, and this year's prices have surpassed last year's record highs, according to the state Agriculture Department. Farmers recently were paying as much as $350 a ton for premium alfalfa hay, a steep increase from the $200 to $250 a ton they paid last year.
...
In Fresno, farmers who need extra water are paying $800 to $1,100 per acre-foot — about 27,160 gallons, or enough to cover an acre with a foot of water — since the county has no allocated water for agriculture this year, Holman said. Last year, growers could buy an acre-foot of water for $140.
< http://www.latimes.com/busines...ry.html >
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
The Sylvania Chamber of Commerce estimates businesses lost a total of nearly $1.5 million dollars in economic revenue during the three-day water ban.
The "no drink" order definitely took its toll and business owners say it's a loss they may never make up.
The SCC director says between 150-200 restaurants are in and around Sylvania.
< http://www.13abc.com/story...inesses >
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
"Some of the private records go back prior to 1860, and nothing has been like this," said Frost.
Frost says this year is so dry it is the tipping point. He says 10 percent of his cattle got so sick in a matter of days, they died or had to be put down when they couldn't digest the hay they were being fed.
In about the last five months, Frost has already sold about 40 percent of his herd.
< http://abc7.com/archive/9431652/ >
XXXXXXXXX
Aquifers provide us freshwater that makes up for surface water lost from drought-depleted lakes, rivers, and reservoirs. We are drawing down these hidden, mostly nonrenewable groundwater supplies at unsustainable rates in the western United States and in several dry regions globally, threatening our future.
...
The Colorado River Basin, which supplies water to 40 million people in seven states, is losing water at dramatic rates, and most of the losses are groundwater. A new satellite study from the University of California, Irvine and NASA indicates that the Colorado River Basin lost 65 cubic kilometers (15.6 cubic miles) of water from 2004 to 2013. That is twice the amount stored in Lake Mead, the largest reservoir in the U.S., which can hold two years' worth of Colorado River runoff. As Jay Famiglietti, a NASA scientist and study co-author wrote here, groundwater made up 75 percent of the water lost in the basin.
...
This coincides with a nationwide trend of groundwater declines. A 2013 study of 40 aquifers across the United States by the U.S. Geological Survey reports that the rate of groundwater depletion has increased dramatically since 2000, with almost 25 cubic kilometers (six cubic miles) of water per year being pumped from the ground. This compares to about 9.2 cubic kilometers (1.48 cubic miles) average withdrawal per year from 1900 to 2008.
< http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news...-crisis >
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXx
Even as fall officially begins in Texas and temperatures dip into the low nineties, 97% of the state is suffering from an extended drought that is pitting neighbor against neighbor in a battle over water. Lakeside restaurants are closed, boat docks stand high and dry, farmers are at odds with suburban gardeners, and small town wells are depleted. In the state’s booming Oil Patch, the earth is cracked and the grass is brittle, but water is still gushing to hundreds of hydraulic fracturing operations. It’s water in, energy and dollars out at a gold-rush pace that some say cannot continue.
< http://nation.time.com/2013...thirsty >
XXXXXXXX
Cargill today announced that it will idle its Plainview, Texas, beef processing facility effective at the close of business, Friday, Feb.1, 2013, resulting primarily from the tight cattle supply brought about by years of drought in Texas and Southern Plains states. Approximately 2,000 people work at the Plainview facility, and they will receive company support.
< http://www.cargill.com/news/releases/2013/NA3070552.jsp >
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 09 2015,6:25 pm
My grandparents used to take me on their annual fishing expeditions to Clear Lake, near Waseca. We'd catch our limit of crappies and bullheads (although I don't think there was a limit on the latter; these are the recollections of a five-year-old) and nobody involved suspected that the catch might be toxic. Today? I wouldn't eat something caught in fresh water south of Lake Pokegama. (That's in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, for the geographically-challenged, where the Mighty Mississippi looks like a creek.)
We're effing this planet up. Only a profit-worshiping moron would suggest otherwise. And population growth shows no sign of abating, anytime soon. And the stupid people are outbreeding the smart ones now, and apparently, the vast majority of them are indifferent to all of this.
My point? I already made it, several posts ago, via Vonnegut. Scroll back, unless you're now so dumbed-down that even the intricacies of that elude you. If that is indeed the case, then you've totally made my point for me.
End of frakking rant.
Posted by hymiebravo on Feb. 09 2015,9:44 pm
If you're talking about about water scarcity and shortages. You don't have to travel any further than your own state of Minnesota.
Posted by hymiebravo on Feb. 09 2015,10:02 pm
QUOTE
Today? I wouldn't eat something caught in fresh water south of Lake Pokegama. (That's in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, for the geographically-challenged, where the Mighty Mississippi looks like a creek.)
I doubt that there is a body of water in the entire state that doesn't have some type of contaminate issue.
You're advised to eat the small ones and limit your intake.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 10 2015,2:21 am
People don't get it (or want to), they just go to the store. That's where food comes from you know. What else can you buy at the store that you never would have thought 30 years ago? Bottled water, who would a thunk. You don't call the fire department after the building has burned to the ground.
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 10 2015,4:51 am
(grassman @ Feb. 10 2015,2:21 am)
QUOTE
People don't get it (or want to), they just go to the store. That's where food comes from you know. What else can you buy at the store that you never would have thought 30 years ago? Bottled water, who would a thunk. You don't call the fire department after the building has burned to the ground.
That's your empirical evidence? Bottled water?
Posted by grassman on Feb. 10 2015,6:15 am
Like I have said before, water is the core to life. Try giving bottled water to your crops, livestock, and everything else. Heck even our bottled water has been found to be compromised. 
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 10 2015,6:41 am
(Botto 82 @ Feb. 09 2015,6:25 pm)
QUOTE
My grandparents used to take me on their annual fishing expeditions to Clear Lake, near Waseca. We'd catch our limit of crappies and bullheads (although I don't think there was a limit on the latter; these are the recollections of a five-year-old) and nobody involved suspected that the catch might be toxic.
Today? I wouldn't eat something caught in fresh water south of Lake Pokegama. (That's in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, for the geographically-challenged, where the Mighty Mississippi looks like a creek.)
We're effing this planet up. Only a profit-worshiping moron would suggest otherwise. And population growth shows no sign of abating, anytime soon. And the stupid people are outbreeding the smart ones now, and apparently, the vast majority of them are indifferent to all of this.
My point? I already made it, several posts ago, via Vonnegut. Scroll back, unless you're now so dumbed-down that even the intricacies of that elude you. If that is indeed the case, then you've totally made my point for me.
End of frakking rant.
Today? I wouldn't eat something caught in fresh water south of Lake Pokegama. (That's in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, for the geographically-challenged, where the Mighty Mississippi looks like a creek.)
We're effing this planet up. Only a profit-worshiping moron would suggest otherwise. And population growth shows no sign of abating, anytime soon. And the stupid people are outbreeding the smart ones now, and apparently, the vast majority of them are indifferent to all of this.
My point? I already made it, several posts ago, via Vonnegut. Scroll back, unless you're now so dumbed-down that even the intricacies of that elude you. If that is indeed the case, then you've totally made my point for me.
End of frakking rant.
Don't hold back Botto, tell us how ya really feel
I didn't realize it was admittedly this bad:
QUOTE
It's the main reason that approximately 40 percent of our surveyed rivers, lakes, and estuaries are not clean enough to meet basic uses such as fishing or swimming.
< http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/outreach/point1.cfm >
Grassman, it seems everything has a price tag now.
Hymie, maybe that should be Albert Lea's first step in promoting and building it's natural resources, not just dredging the crap out of the lakes, but doing something about the cause of the problems.
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 10 2015,8:41 am
Let this be our legacy, when space aliens discover our long-dead civilization: We could have save our planet, and ourselves, too, for that matter, but we were too lazy and cheap.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 10 2015,8:45 am
You say don't hold back about how we really feel about this subject Roz?OK
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,8:48 am
What have any of you done to change anything, aside from acting like it's everyone elses fault?
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 10 2015,9:43 am
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,8:48 am)
QUOTE
What have any of you done to change anything, aside from acting like it's everyone elses fault?
Me? Probably not a damned thing. The world's been on the verge of collapse since I could pick up my first Weekly Reader, it seems it's still here. Even if we could do something as a nation do you think China or Russia or any other emerging economy going to conform? Doubtful. They're going to see it as an advantage to get ahead.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 10 2015,9:43 am
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,8:48 am)
QUOTE
What have any of you done to change anything, aside from acting like it's everyone elses fault?
I've already talked about what I've done. Granted it's not much, but I do what I can. Unfortunately, going big takes far more money than I have. Far more money than most people have. Most everything I buy is used, I haven't had a car for years. I carpool or walk. I bring my own cloth bags to stores. When nobody is home the heat is set at 50. When the kids are not home the heat is set at 50. At night the heat is set at 50. We don't use household chemicals other than dish soap and laundry soap. We don't use pesticides or weed killers or anything on the lawn. Most importantly, I've been teaching my children the importance of taking care of the environment.- Being careful not to scare or depress them.
When their school decided to give students IPads, I complained, telling them students should also be taught to care for the environment, and while technology can be good, it's also quite damaging to the environment, and since the school is constantly having money problems, I also questioned how they were able to give so many students these devices. Then I find out that most schools in America are giving students IPads, laptops, or some other device. Even though they are horribly expensive and so many schools are always hurting for money. - To me it just doesn't make sense.
We use as little water and electricity as possible.
We recycle dang near everything, we don't buy much of anything that can't be recycled or the packaging can't be recycled.
Do I feel I am doing much at all? Hell no. If I could afford it, I would see to it that we didn't leave hardly any sort of footprint on the environment at all.
So I feel, the biggest way for anyone to help fix the problems, right now, is to alert more and more people to the actual problems. Otherwise, not much at all is going to change.
Am I wrong?
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,9:55 am
If you could afford it, you'd still sit on your lazy ass and post crazy conspiracy crap all over the internet.Scare your kids? I heard one was so worried about going back to live with you that they jumped out of a moving car. How much more scared could someone be?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 10 2015,10:04 am
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 10 2015,9:43 am)
QUOTE
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,8:48 am)
QUOTE
What have any of you done to change anything, aside from acting like it's everyone elses fault?
Me? Probably not a damned thing. The world's been on the verge of collapse since I could pick up my first Weekly Reader, it seems it's still here. Even if we could do something as a nation do you think China or Russia or any other emerging economy going to conform? Doubtful. They're going to see it as an advantage to get ahead.
That's a valid assumption, but I happen to think if governments were honest with themselves, and especially honest with their citizens, that big changes would be made. The Aral Sea- gone. Every country in the world is having major problems with pollution in their air, land and water. Every country is dealing with water shortages. China is having to hand pollinate because their pollinators are gone for godsake. Not to mention all the other problems China has.
I don't think a Global Race to the bottom is the right choice.
You think there isn't going to come a point in the near future where it all hits critical? THEN, things will without a doubt change. But only because we've hit bottom.
liberal:
QUOTE
Scare your kids? I heard one was so worried about going back to live with you that they jumped out of a moving car. How much more scared could someone be?
Wow, did you hear wrong. Nothing changes with you does it lib. Lies and insults. Great way to run a forum.
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,10:41 am
More BS from the nutter.< http://www.wired.com/2014/05/will-we-still-have-fruit-if-bees-die-off/ >
China has bees, they hand pollinate for economic reasons.
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,10:48 am
Also if anyone cares the Aral sea had the rivers that supplied it diverted for irrigation in the 60s and the Soviets expected it to be empty by 1964.At least she's consistent.
< http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea >
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 10 2015,11:13 am
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,10:41 am)
QUOTE
More BS from the nutter.
< http://www.wired.com/2014/05/will-we-still-have-fruit-if-bees-die-off/ >
China has bees, they hand pollinate for economic reasons.
< http://www.wired.com/2014/05/will-we-still-have-fruit-if-bees-die-off/ >
China has bees, they hand pollinate for economic reasons.
Take it up with PBS. About 40 minutes into the video is when they talk about the bees dying off in parts of China and the government telling the pear farmers to pollinate them by hand. But I'm a nutter just makin crap up in my head.
< View on YouTube >
QUOTE
Also if anyone cares the Aral sea had the rivers that supplied it diverted for irrigation in the 60s and the Soviets expected it to be empty by 1964.
And the poisons left behind by the Aral Sea? And how it's spreading?
Lake Mead and many others were man-made. Does that mean we shouldn't be concerned that they are being depleted drastically?
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,11:21 am
Who cares what PBS said?Now you're not concerned with the fact that the Aral sea is gone, now it's a pollution issue?
Is there anything you won't lie about?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 10 2015,11:39 am
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,11:21 am)
QUOTE
Who cares what PBS said?
Now you're not concerned with the fact that the Aral sea is gone, now it's a pollution issue?
Is there anything you won't lie about?
Now you're not concerned with the fact that the Aral sea is gone, now it's a pollution issue?
Is there anything you won't lie about?
Wired is more trustworthy than PBS. Got it.
QUOTE
Now you're not concerned with the fact that the Aral sea is gone
The water is still gone yes? And how many lives did that devastate? How many people who depend on Lake Mead and others will also be devastated when that is gone?
liberal:
QUOTE
Is there anything you won't lie about?
Goodgod I'm done. Obviously you don't see how ridiculous you've become in the last couple years. I've actually felt sorry for you so many times. You make things almost impossible here. But just when I think you realize how you must look to other forum members and that you have gotten over yourself, you start right back up. And are even more irrational and disgusting. Out of courtesy for the other forum members, I am done here.
Election coming up next year, better get some important discussions going.
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,11:47 am
< http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-pollination >You kooks are all the same. You lie about something get caught and change the subject.
And yes the water in the Aral sea is nearly gone but isn't gone because of climate change you liar.
And you're not done, that's just another lie, you'll be back after the next mass murder claiming the guys in black helicopters killed them, or they never existed and the government and first responders are all lying.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 10 2015,12:07 pm
I personally know bee keepers, they told me that their hive has been declining over the last few years. They must be lying too!
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,12:19 pm
Why did your bee friends claim they have to hand pollinate their crops?
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 10 2015,12:42 pm
Hand pollinating??? Why do I have a mental picture of Alky with a tube of KY jelly and a copy of Hustler???Ewwww! Ewwww! Ewwww!
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,12:44 pm
Well just guessing I'd go with homoerotic fixation?
Posted by alcitizens on Feb. 10 2015,5:08 pm
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,12:44 pm)
QUOTE
Well just guessing I'd go with homoerotic fixation?
The Wrath of Libby.. Beware..
I think SB might just have a Homoerotic fixation..
Hustler is gross..
I prefer quality reading material..
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 10 2015,5:29 pm
^^pure culture.
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 10 2015,5:51 pm
QUOTE
The Wrath of Libby.. Beware..
No way I could've let that one go.
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 10 2015,7:41 pm
Well played.
Posted by hymiebravo on Feb. 10 2015,9:43 pm
Well if it is any consolation. . . I for one, feel somewhat more enlightened, about the bee situation, pollen and the inner workings of orchards now.
Posted by stardust14 on Feb. 11 2015,2:22 am
@Rosalind, wise move on your part. When the rabid dogs become bored insulting and biting one another, dragging their rotting corpses over here to infect this conversation...time to leave and find a new spot to talk.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 11 2015,6:17 am
(Liberal @ Feb. 10 2015,12:19 pm)
QUOTE
Why did your bee friends claim they have to hand pollinate their crops?
They never mentioned crops. It was all about the bees. Bees have been in the decline.
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 11 2015,6:45 am
Everyone knows about C.C.D. we were talking about pollution in China. The nut said the bees were gone in China so that the people had to hand pollinate.QUOTE
The Aral Sea- gone. Every country in the world is having major problems with pollution in their air, land and water. Every country is dealing with water shortages. China is having to hand pollinate because their pollinators are gone for godsake.
What the nut got wound up about is that I showed they've hand pollinated for many reasons since the early 80's and lack of bees had nothing to do with it. I also pointed out the Soviets intentionally took the water from the Aral sea and had expected it to dry up in 1964.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 11 2015,6:59 am
So are you in agreement that the waters and evnviroment of the world are in danger or not?
Posted by Liberal on Feb. 11 2015,7:38 am
Well, not to the extent that seas are drying up and the Chinese are hand pollinating. That's just BS conspiracy crap and it does nothing to help the environmental movement when people make crazy claims like that, in fact it sort of proves the conservatives point about the environmental movement being full of crazies.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 13 2015,10:54 am
Since I never once said that the disappearance of the Aral Sea was the result of climate change, but instead used the Aral Sea as an example of the devastation that can, and will most likely happen, as a result of our own mismanagement and idiocy, this post is the one and only time you can honestly call me a liar. - I said I was done with this forum, so this post does indeed make me a liar. Your Aral Sea/Climate Change response is just another example of how rarely does anything come out of your mouth that isn't a twisting of words or an outright lie. I really can't figure out if this problem of yours is related to your ego or some kind of psychological Disorder.I'm sure what I'm about to say will have little effect on you whatsoever, and since it seems the major focus of this forum is belittling and attacking others instead of having actual discussions, maybe what I'm about to say will have little effect on anyone.
Your lack of empathy and decency is mind-boggling.
QUOTE
Scare your kids? I heard one was so worried about going back to live with you that they jumped out of a moving car. How much more scared could someone be?
Do you have any idea, or do you even care, how horrifying and traumatizing that event was in my family's life? How close we came to losing my daughter? Or the pain she suffered? The pain we all suffered? To you it's nothing. Nothing more than something for your sick mind to twist and outright lie about and throw into my face when your previous lies and twists just weren't enough.
Was this < http://www.albertleatribune.com/2011...hildren > the only source of your disgusting statement? Did your reading comprehension problems interfere with your ability to digest what you read? Did you intentionally lie about the event in hopes of getting an explosive reaction out of me or just to hurt me in some way? Or is there a different source of your lie? If it wasn't your sick mind, and indeed it was a different person, give me the person's name because I am more than ready and able, and have more than enough proof, to clear up your disgusting assertion in court.
Of course, knowing how you are, you will just twist and lie about something in my post or pick some other way to distract from, and avoid answering any of my questions.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 13 2015,11:55 am
Roz, I did not get to finish the article, Albert Lea Tribune has got to be the very worst site on the internet. Freezes up, blocks you from reading, total worthless site! 
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Feb. 14 2015,8:49 am
Sent it to you in private message Grassman.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 14 2015,9:15 am
Thank you Roz.
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 14 2015,10:30 am
This is off the thread topic, so I'll be brief. Roz, I feel your pain, though my involvement with these people was mercifully brief. They are self-justifying, knee-jerk-reaction-having overfunded morons who treat each and every case they encounter as some potential worst-case scenario, and often end up doing more harm than good, all at taxpayers' expense. It was a satisfying moment when I threw them out of my daughter's life for good. Again, I'm sorry you had/have to endure them.
Posted by irisheyes on Feb. 16 2015,2:04 am
(grassman @ Feb. 13 2015,11:55 am)
QUOTE
Albert Lea Tribune has got to be the very worst site on the internet. Freezes up, blocks you from reading, total worthless site!
If you're using Firefox, install Adblock Plus and check out < this thread >. Grinning Dragon put together a pretty good custom filter to block the poll questions.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 27 2015,6:11 am
Another fine example of the integrity of the ever trusted oil profiteers.Hundreds of pits filled with oil wastewater discovered in California's Kern County
Unbeknown to California officials, oil producers in Kern County have been disposing of chemical-laden wastewater in hundreds of unlined trenches in the ground without proper permits, according to an inventory that regional water officials completed this week.
The Los Angeles Times obtained the results of the survey conducted by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, which uncovered more than 300 pits that officials previously didn't know existed. Expected to be released Friday, the survey also revealed that more than one-third of the region's active waste pits are operating without required permits.
Kern County accounts for at least 80 percent of California's oil production.
The pits — long shallow troughs in the dirt — hold water that is produced from fracking and other oil-drilling operations. The so-called flowback water is heavily saline and often contains benzene and other naturally occurring but toxic substances.
Officials said they believe that none of the hundreds of waste pits in the county have linings that would prevent toxic chemicals from infiltrating groundwater underneath. Linings are not currently required, but officials say they are considering implementing a requirement. Some of the pits also lack netting or covers to protect migrating birds and other wildlife.
Officials at the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board called the unregulated pits a "significant problem" and said they expect to issue as many as 200 enforcement orders.
Clay Rodgers, assistant executive officer of the water board's Fresno office, said Thursday that there are 933 pits, or sumps, in California. Of those, 578 are active and 355 are not currently being used. Of the active pits, 370 have permits to operate and 208 do not. All of pits have now been inspected, he said.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 27 2015,8:10 am
Yep, let's just shut it all down, jail all the oil company executives, scrap our cars, eat nuts and twigs, crap in the back yard and wipe ourselves with sticks😗
Posted by Botto 82 on Feb. 27 2015,8:46 am
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 27 2015,8:10 am)
QUOTE
Yep, let's just shut it all down, jail all the oil company executives, scrap our cars, eat nuts and twigs, crap in the back yard and wipe ourselves with sticks😗
So those are our only choices? Either let the profiteering energy companies crap all over the environment, or go back to the stone age? That's a pretty simplistic view.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 27 2015,9:03 am
The cab of that truck is pretty small, hard to see things clearly beyond several yards.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 27 2015,9:07 am
Well it seems all folks like you two just bitch for the sake of bitching. OK, let's try this, we'll have the gov. Take over the oil companies, that'll work If you're gonna make an omlet, you have to break a few eggs.
And as far as making a profit? If you have a company and you're not making a profit the next word coming out of your piehole is "bankruptcy"
Posted by grassman on Feb. 27 2015,9:11 am
You demand that people be accountable all of the time, well, corporate is now people. Right? 
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 27 2015,9:16 am
Aren't we all??
Posted by grassman on Feb. 27 2015,9:34 am
So you agree that these companies should be held accountable and be prosecuted to the extent that they will not ever do it again?
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 27 2015,10:05 am
Sure, but let's not stop there, everyone accountable, squirting out another kid while you're on welfare? Sorry lady, no more welfare, lost your job because you flunked a drug test? No no, no unemployment, pay for your own damned treatment, dui and killed someone in an accident? Well, you can take it from there.If we're going to make corperate accountable, let's make everyone a accountable.
Posted by irisheyes on Feb. 27 2015,10:49 pm
(Botto 82 @ Feb. 27 2015,8:46 am)
QUOTE
So those are our only choices? Either let the profiteering energy companies crap all over the environment, or go back to the stone age? That's a pretty simplistic view.
SB doesn't believe in environmental laws, I think he's suggesting that we can only disagree if we all get rid of machines and technology. So those are our alternatives, let them break the law and poison the groundwater, or we all have to become Amish.
QUOTE
Sure, but let's not stop there, everyone accountable, squirting out another kid while you're on welfare? Sorry lady, no more welfare, lost your job because you flunked a drug test? No no, no unemployment, pay for your own damned treatment, dui and killed someone in an accident? Well, you can take it from there.
If we're going to make corperate accountable, let's make everyone a accountable.
If we're going to make corperate accountable, let's make everyone a accountable.
So the only people that shouldn't be accountable are corporations? The other law breakers you listed aren't ignored (having a child in poverty isn't a crime). Don't believe me, get busted for driving drunk and let me know how that goes. Ask them what would happen if you'd killed someone, tell them you're under the impression there isn't accountability for those crimes.
Pay no attention to all that groundwater that's been polluted, folks. That pregnant woman on welfare, she's the problem.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 28 2015,12:05 am
(irisheyes @ Feb. 27 2015,10:49 pm)
QUOTE
(Botto 82 @ Feb. 27 2015,8:46 am)
QUOTE
So those are our only choices? Either let the profiteering energy companies crap all over the environment, or go back to the stone age? That's a pretty simplistic view.
SB doesn't believe in environmental laws, I think he's suggesting that we can only disagree if we all get rid of machines and technology. So those are our alternatives, let them break the law and poison the groundwater, or we all have to become Amish.
QUOTE
Sure, but let's not stop there, everyone accountable, squirting out another kid while you're on welfare? Sorry lady, no more welfare, lost your job because you flunked a drug test? No no, no unemployment, pay for your own damned treatment, dui and killed someone in an accident? Well, you can take it from there.
If we're going to make corperate accountable, let's make everyone a accountable.
If we're going to make corperate accountable, let's make everyone a accountable.
So the only people that shouldn't be accountable are corporations? The other law breakers you listed aren't ignored (having a child in poverty isn't a crime). Don't believe me, get busted for driving drunk and let me know how that goes. Ask them what would happen if you'd killed someone, tell them you're under the impression there isn't accountability for those crimes.
Pay no attention to all that groundwater that's been polluted, folks. That pregnant woman on welfare, she's the problem.
I don"t believe in environmental law? Now who has the simplistic view? It just seems a bit hypocritical to whine about pollution then enjoy all that petroleum provides for us. Should the be laws against dumping hazardous substances? Of course there should be.
As for being responsible, DUI? You sound like you speak from experience IE. Driving drunk or stoned has got to be one of the most idiotic, selfish and irresponsible acts I have ever seen.
Posted by irisheyes on Feb. 28 2015,12:15 am
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 28 2015,12:05 am)
QUOTE
I don"t believe in environmental law? Now who has the simplistic view? It just seems a bit hypocritical to whine about pollution then enjoy all that petroleum provides for us. Should the be laws against dumping hazardous substances? Of course there should be.
You're up late.
I stand corrected. If you're okay with those laws why the rush to blame others (driving infractions, welfare moms, people who use petroleum products)?
QUOTE
As for being responsible, DUI? You sound like you speak from experience IE. Driving drunk or stoned has got to be one of the most idiotic, selfish and irresponsible acts I have ever seen.
No, never had a DUI. I just wanted to correct you since you implied that someone who has a DUI and kills someone isn't held accountable.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 28 2015,8:26 am
SB can't grasp that you can still use a product of someone and not like the fact that they break the law. Oil is in our lives. It would be very hard to get by without it in one way or another. Should that give them a pass? Most towns have a law against blowing snow or grass into the street. I could do it and probably wouldn't get caught. I choose to do the right thing.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 28 2015,9:33 am
(grassman @ Feb. 28 2015,8:26 am)
QUOTE
Most towns have a law against blowing snow or grass into the street. I could do it and probably wouldn't get caught. I choose to do the right thing.
Wow, what a model citizen
Today's lesson in civics children
Posted by grassman on Feb. 28 2015,11:49 am
I think I am beginning to understand why you don't drink.
Posted by Self-Banished on Feb. 28 2015,4:10 pm
(grassman @ Feb. 28 2015,11:49 am)
QUOTE
I think I am beginning to understand why you don't drink.
Go ahead, take a stab at it
I'll tell you if you're right?
Posted by grassman on Mar. 01 2015,6:42 am
Your comprehension and response skills are already challenged.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 01 2015,8:43 am
^^as yours
Posted by grassman on Mar. 01 2015,7:30 pm
(Self-Banished @ Feb. 28 2015,9:33 am)
QUOTE
(grassman @ Feb. 28 2015,8:26 am)
QUOTE
Most towns have a law against blowing snow or grass into the street. I could do it and probably wouldn't get caught. I choose to do the right thing.
Wow, what a model citizen
Today's lesson in civics children
So you seem to think someone obeying the law and doing the right thing is laughable. I see how you roll. It ain't good. I suppose driving trucks over loaded is perfectly ok as long as you don't get caught.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 01 2015,8:58 pm
^^for me, the lighter the load the more $$$ I make. It's very simple, less weight= less fuel burned, less wear and tear.The Somalies are the ones taking all the overweight stuff. The DOT leaves them alone because of a language barrier.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 02 2015,5:47 am
So do you agree to the statement that you think someone obeying the law and doing the right thing is laughable and just plain stupid?
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 02 2015,10:32 am
Some people just get away with more stuff just because of who they are. It's just the way life goes.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 02 2015,2:13 pm
You are avoiding the question.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 02 2015,2:52 pm
(grassman @ Mar. 02 2015,2:13 pm)
QUOTE
You are avoiding the question.
Ok, sometimes it is laughable, sometimes a guy thinks that some clown should get the book thrown at them and whoever is enforcing the rules or laws doesn't give a damn.
I guess it just comes down to one thing.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 03 2015,6:15 am
That one thing being....? 
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 03 2015,9:53 am
(grassman @ Mar. 03 2015,6:15 am)
QUOTE
That one thing being...?
Life's tough Buttercup😜
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 03 2015,9:54 am
^^^jeezus, felt like I drove around the world for that one.
Posted by MADDOG on Mar. 03 2015,10:10 am
WAIT...WAIT...WAIT...HERE IT COMES...WAIT...WAITWOW!
< View on YouTube >
Posted by grassman on Mar. 03 2015,9:18 pm
You are right, life is tough. Tougher than it has to be because some take advantage of others and anything they can. Some will fall right in because they might miss out on a crumb if they flex a muscle. Some try and say they are all that and a bag of chips because they don't depend on others. In the long run, they don't have the balls to stand up for what is right. Morality and business can work together, you just have to weed out the bad branches.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 04 2015,7:38 am
(grassman @ Mar. 03 2015,9:18 pm)
QUOTE
You are right, life is tough. Tougher than it has to be because some take advantage of others and anything they can. Some will fall right in because they might miss out on a crumb if they flex a muscle. Some try and say they are all that and a bag of chips because they don't depend on others. In the long run, they don't have the balls to stand up for what is right. Morality and business can work together, you just have to weed out the bad branches.
Please tell me, what's the difference between law and morality? And if we should be more moral, where do we get our morals from?
Careful with your answers.
Posted by stardust14 on Mar. 04 2015,12:44 pm
Morals are human inventions, ideas of behavior that evolve over time through being tested on human culture survivability. Immorality is non-participation in that process.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 04 2015,12:52 pm
But what is man's inspiration for morels??
Posted by grassman on Mar. 04 2015,3:13 pm
(Self-Banished @ Mar. 04 2015,12:52 pm)
QUOTE
But what is man's inspiration for morels??
That my friend is what comes from the integrity and fiber of a man.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 04 2015,5:03 pm
(grassman @ Mar. 04 2015,3:13 pm)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Mar. 04 2015,12:52 pm)
QUOTE
But what is man's inspiration for morels??
That my friend is what comes from the integrity and fiber of a man.
I call bullsh!t on that one. Keep trying
Posted by grassman on Mar. 05 2015,5:53 am
I know you would...too bad.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 05 2015,8:38 am
(grassman @ Mar. 05 2015,5:53 am)
QUOTE
I know you would...too bad.
quitter😁
What I was trying to get you to say is that our morals come from religeion, at least that's where I believe they come from. Thing is, different faiths have different morals.
Our government wants us to have faith in them so we follow what they think we should believe. In other words, they want to be God.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 05 2015,10:27 am
You are right, the Bible is full of morality. The Ten Commandments are just that. What I am saying, a man's integrity and fiber naturally kicks in to guide his morality. Sometimes one might think about it but usually, one just feels right from wrong, if it is in his fiber. Laws were made for those that are lacking in this respect. Today's corporate world is lacking quite heavily.
Posted by Liberal on Mar. 05 2015,10:40 am
I think his point is you base your morals on Christianity. That's why a Muslim, or Sikh have different morals than us. To us it's immoral to stone someone, but to a Muslim it's their moral duty to stone someone for what they perceive as being immoral.So SB is right and also proves the old saying that even a broken watch is right twice a day.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 05 2015,11:39 am
^^ so we're following the bible??? What about the Koran?
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 05 2015,11:41 am
Sorry Lib, I didn't refresh before I posted.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 05 2015,12:34 pm
(Liberal @ Mar. 05 2015,10:40 am)
QUOTE
To us it's immoral to stone someone, but to a Muslim it's their moral duty to stone someone for what they perceive as being immoral.
And we have laws against that type of action. Therefore if that is the way you wish to live, you best not do it here.
I still say that true morality comes from within a person.
Besides, what does religion have to do with corporates ignoring laws and such?
Posted by Liberal on Mar. 05 2015,1:26 pm
Are you saying that you'd stone someone if it were legal?
Posted by grassman on Mar. 05 2015,3:50 pm
Exactly where did I imply that was an option to ME?
Posted by stardust14 on Mar. 06 2015,12:17 pm
Morals [U]appear to be a human survival strategy both among other species and within our own species. One could argue morals have been successful compared to immorality. Currently other species are classified as incapable of morality/immorality--their behavior is seen as strictly survivalist. How odd one species subjectively claims superiority over rival strategies of survival. But then that's just another component of survival. And time will prove if morals outlast cynobacteria(inhabitants for around 3 billion years).People discuss morality/immorality. Some become religious or intellectual, others more nihilistic. It is a healthy endeavor. Wars over competing moral views(if any truly exist, which I doubt) would be an extension of that debate. Nationalism, jihadism, capitalism, communism, etc mask themselves behind morals. All are mere attempts at survivability.
Hats off to SB for reviving this thread from the land of the dead
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 06 2015,12:43 pm
(stardust14 @ Mar. 06 2015,12:17 pm)
QUOTE
Morals [U]appear to be a human survival strategy both among other species and within our own species. One could argue morals have been successful compared to immorality. Currently other species are classified as incapable of morality/immorality--their behavior is seen as strictly survivalist. How odd one species subjectively claims superiority over rival strategies of survival. But then that's just another component of survival. And time will prove if morals outlast cynobacteria(inhabitants for around 3 billion years).
People discuss morality/immorality. Some become religious or intellectual, others more nihilistic. It is a healthy endeavor. Wars over competing moral views(if any truly exist, which I doubt) would be an extension of that debate. Nationalism, jihadism, capitalism, communism, etc mask themselves behind morals. All are mere attempts at survivability.
Hats off to SB for reviving this thread from the land of the dead
People discuss morality/immorality. Some become religious or intellectual, others more nihilistic. It is a healthy endeavor. Wars over competing moral views(if any truly exist, which I doubt) would be an extension of that debate. Nationalism, jihadism, capitalism, communism, etc mask themselves behind morals. All are mere attempts at survivability.
Hats off to SB for reviving this thread from the land of the dead
Thanks for putting it clearly, I was being clumsy at my approach.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 06 2015,3:18 pm
Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong). Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc., or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal.[1] Morality may also be specifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness." Immorality is the active opposition to morality (i.e. opposition to that which is good or right), while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles.[2][3][4]Moral philosophy includes moral ontology, or the origin of morals, as well as moral epistemology, or what is known about morals. Different systems of expressing morality have been proposed, including deontological ethical systems which adhere to a set of established rules, and normative ethical systems which consider the merits of actions themselves. An example of normative ethical philosophy is the Golden Rule which states that, "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."[5]
SB, this is not it!
Posted by alcitizens on Mar. 06 2015,3:53 pm
< View on YouTube >
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 06 2015,5:02 pm
(grassman @ Mar. 06 2015,3:18 pm)
QUOTE
Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong). Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc., or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal.[1] Morality may also be specifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness." Immorality is the active opposition to morality (i.e. opposition to that which is good or right), while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles.[2][3][4]
Moral philosophy includes moral ontology, or the origin of morals, as well as moral epistemology, or what is known about morals. Different systems of expressing morality have been proposed, including deontological ethical systems which adhere to a set of established rules, and normative ethical systems which consider the merits of actions themselves. An example of normative ethical philosophy is the Golden Rule which states that, "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."[5]
SB, this is not it!
Moral philosophy includes moral ontology, or the origin of morals, as well as moral epistemology, or what is known about morals. Different systems of expressing morality have been proposed, including deontological ethical systems which adhere to a set of established rules, and normative ethical systems which consider the merits of actions themselves. An example of normative ethical philosophy is the Golden Rule which states that, "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."[5]
SB, this is not it!
They're tasty though.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 07 2015,8:16 am
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 07 2015,8:29 am
Is that a Rorshack?
Posted by grassman on Mar. 08 2015,7:22 am
Come on now, you are not in the truck stop shower, speak english.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 08 2015,7:52 am
Rorschach is a psychological evaluation test(maybe something you ought to look into)And it's been years since I've been in a truckstop.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 08 2015,7:57 am
When you took your Rorshack test, (however it is spelled, seems to be many) how did you come out?
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 08 2015,8:04 am
I've never formally taken one.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 09 2015,9:08 am
Prolly should!
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 09 2015,10:26 am
(grassman @ Mar. 09 2015,9:08 am)
QUOTE
Prolly should!
So should you but they'd probably commit you afterwards
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 09 2015,10:55 am
< http://www.newsmax.com/US...2 >
Posted by grassman on Mar. 09 2015,11:55 am
Ok SB, concentrate.... look at the title of the thread...now go back and look at your article you want us to read. Think real hard and tell me what you think. 
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 09 2015,12:11 pm
^^^so you're pissed about older men increasing testosterone?
Posted by grassman on Mar. 09 2015,12:18 pm
Well, now that you mention it I think some should concentrate more on increasing knowledge.
Posted by Self-Banished on Mar. 09 2015,12:57 pm
(grassman @ Mar. 09 2015,12:18 pm)
QUOTE
Well, now that you mention it I think some should concentrate more on increasing knowledge.
That road to self-improvement is a long one but I have faith in you.
Posted by grassman on Mar. 09 2015,1:02 pm
I'll throw you a tow line!
Posted by grassman on Apr. 07 2015,1:52 pm
Now that California is faced with a water shortage, we can see how everyone deals with it. If we are not careful, the whole country could be in the same predicament. If we keep throwing the dice with water, we will eventually crap out. I wonder what will happen when we start bringing that tainted water back up from the depths? Best plant a garden while you can, veggies are going to go through the roof!
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 08 2015,10:10 am
Sounds like those tree huggin' liberals are doing their best to help conserve.QUOTE
< Amid Call for Conservation, Water Use Increases by 2.3 Percent in SoCal >
Amid the worst drought on record, Californians’ water conservation levels dropped to a “dismal” rate, with Southern Californians actually increasing their usage, figures released Tuesday showed.
The data, for the month of February, is the most recent available. It shows water consumption was reduced by just 2.8 percent statewide, compared to 2013 levels, down from an 8 percent conservation rate in January and a peak of 22.1 percent in December.
The South Coast region was the worst across the state, with February water use actually increasing 2.3 percent compared to 2013 levels.
Amid the worst drought on record, Californians’ water conservation levels dropped to a “dismal” rate, with Southern Californians actually increasing their usage, figures released Tuesday showed.
The data, for the month of February, is the most recent available. It shows water consumption was reduced by just 2.8 percent statewide, compared to 2013 levels, down from an 8 percent conservation rate in January and a peak of 22.1 percent in December.
The South Coast region was the worst across the state, with February water use actually increasing 2.3 percent compared to 2013 levels.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 08 2015,10:26 am
So how are we going to feel when they come up with some hairbrained idea like a pipeline from the Great Lakes to So. Cal?
Posted by grassman on Apr. 08 2015,1:53 pm
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 08 2015,10:26 am)
QUOTE
So how are we going to feel when they come up with some hairbrained idea like a pipeline from the Great Lakes to So. Cal?
Why not? Look at all the jobs that would create! Get a leak, plant a garden!
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 08 2015,3:34 pm
(grassman @ Apr. 08 2015,1:53 pm)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 08 2015,10:26 am)
QUOTE
So how are we going to feel when they come up with some hairbrained idea like a pipeline from the Great Lakes to So. Cal?
Why not? Look at all the jobs that would create! Get a leak, plant a garden!
Why would we? Cal. would probably demand we filter the water to Dasanni standards before they accept it
They're thrones that over populated, they can deal with it.
Posted by grassman on Apr. 08 2015,4:19 pm
Ok, you are all for building pipelines to transport oil for other countries across our soil but against water pipelines that would serve members of our country?
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 08 2015,7:01 pm
^^works kinda like locusts, they mess up where they're at and then look elsewhere.Like the tribes who have fished( gill netted) Mille Lacs out to the point the slot is 19-20" with one walleye so now they're heading to Vermillion to net and ruin that lake.
Besides, who'd get the bill for the pipeline?
Posted by grassman on Apr. 08 2015,8:28 pm
All the fatcats in California. They got money, don't ya watch TV? SWIMMING POOLS, MOVIE STARS...
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 08 2015,8:33 pm
^^private enterprise?That's a horse of a different color
Posted by irisheyes on Apr. 09 2015,6:36 am
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 08 2015,10:26 am)
QUOTE
So how are we going to feel when they come up with some hairbrained idea like a pipeline from the Great Lakes to So. Cal?
Why the double standard here? If Republican politicians favored a pipeline for a Canadian oil company like TransCanada, you'd be 100% in favor of it. You've said repeatedly that pipelines are safer and more efficient than using truck or train to transport oil. Californians are trucking water more and more, wouldn't pipelines be safer and more efficient according to your own logic?
Apparently the answer changes when we're talking about water for people and businesses instead of moving dirty (tar sands) oil for a Canadian oil company.
I'm not suggesting they should truck it or build a water pipeline, I just think it's strange how quick the answer changes when we talk about water instead of oil.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 09 2015,8:09 am
One poin quicklyI don't launch my boat on a lake of oil
And for me to even consider supporting something like that it would have to be a private sector endeavor which would mean Cal. coming up with a sh!tload of cash, something they're desperately short of lately.
If they run out of water they'll have to do what humans have been doing for centuries, migrate
Posted by irisheyes on Apr. 09 2015,9:41 am
Exactly, the water delivery trucks the news is interviewing are private business. That's why I was having a hard time with your posts before on it.Strictly hypothetical though, we won't see a pipeline from here to California. I think most of it could be solved by giving more teeth to the "water cops" in some of these cities in the Mojave Desert. Water utilities are often the most regressive, yet it's probably the most important to public health. Currently that first flush of your toilet is the sound of you subsidizing large business/residential units who get a lower water/sewer rate.
Kind of like the roads and bridges in Minnesota, they just keep raising the fees for everyone else to please the Chamber of Commerce.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 09 2015,10:46 am
(irisheyes @ Apr. 09 2015,9:41 am)
QUOTE
I think most of it could be solved by giving more teeth to the "water cops" in some of these cities in the Mojave Desert
Yep, abusers should be stood out on their front lawn and shot
Posted by grassman on Apr. 09 2015,10:56 am
Our fresh water supply is in very grave danger. Here is a picture of Lake Mead last year!
Posted by Botto 82 on Apr. 09 2015,11:26 am
This isn't going to get better until we start having serious conversations about stabilizing population growth. (Somebody had to say it.)
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 09 2015,1:24 pm
(Botto 82 @ Apr. 09 2015,11:26 am)
QUOTE
This isn't going to get better until we start having serious conversations about stabilizing population growth. (Somebody had to say it.)
I agree,
Culling out the pathetic
Anyone seem Expat??
Posted by Expatriate on Apr. 09 2015,2:45 pm
California's Power Plants run relatively low loads from the hours of 10PM to 5:30AM they could use this excess capacity for desalination of seawater, they’ve got a whole ocean full of water! Problem is payback on investment, should this be a temporary drought Utilities would eat it big time.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 09 2015,3:01 pm
^^^And GE would make a ton more $$ that they'd avoid taxes on.
Posted by Expatriate on Apr. 09 2015,3:12 pm
^^^Could you be more specific? Does GE sell or build desalination equipment?
Posted by grassman on Apr. 09 2015,3:40 pm
Desalination is a alternative for coastal areas, however, the interior areas would be in big trouble if the water supply is compromised. People in the Midwest would be screwed. How does that Keystone pipeline sound to you now?
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 09 2015,3:44 pm
(grassman @ Apr. 09 2015,3:40 pm)
QUOTE
Desalination is a alternative for coastal areas, however, the interior areas would be in big trouble if the water supply is compromised. People in the Midwest would be screwed. How does that Keystone pipeline sound to you now?
The sky is falling where I'm at too Gman, but it seems to be in small wet drops right now.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 09 2015,3:54 pm
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 09 2015,8:09 am)
QUOTE
If they run out of water they'll have to do what humans have been doing for centuries, migrate
Are you sure you want the take the chance of them migrating here SB? Seems to me there is an alternative.
Maybe Lex Luthor can still devise a plan to drop nuclear warheads on the San Andreas fault-line thus dumping California into the ocean.
Posted by grassman on Apr. 09 2015,5:30 pm
(MADDOG @ Apr. 09 2015,3:44 pm)
QUOTE
The sky is falling where I'm at too Gman, but it seems to be in small wet drops right now.
Enjoy it while you have it, nothing is guaranteed.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 09 2015,5:52 pm
(Expatriate @ Apr. 09 2015,3:12 pm)
QUOTE
^^^Could you be more specific? Does GE sell or build desalination equipment?
GE bought Osmonics about ten years ago. Water filtration and desalination. GE has their mitts into everything.
Posted by Expatriate on Apr. 09 2015,6:19 pm
^^^GE was Thomas Edison's company, it’s been a ruthless outfit from the beginning.We have turbines from GE we also have turbines from their competitors Westinghouse, Elliott and Pratt Whitney gas turbines.
Their turbines are nice equipment but I don’t like anybody not paying their share of tax.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 10 2015,4:42 am
^^are their accountants that good or is the IRS told from on high to treat them with kid gloves?
Posted by grassman on Apr. 10 2015,6:19 am
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 10 2015,4:42 am)
QUOTE
^^are their accountants that good or is the IRS told from on high to treat them with kid gloves?
They are just following the business model provided by their whores in Washington.
Posted by Botto 82 on Apr. 10 2015,6:50 am
(grassman @ Apr. 10 2015,6:19 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 10 2015,4:42 am)
QUOTE
^^are their accountants that good or is the IRS told from on high to treat them with kid gloves?
They are just following the business model provided by their whores in Washington.
Exactly.
Remember when this country made things, and the rich paid their fair share, and the middle class wielded incredible buying power and the country as a whole prospered?
It all started to go downhill when Reagan became President, and Roger Smith was running GM into the ground.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 10 2015,10:00 am
^^don't kid yourself, the labor unions had a large hand in GM's fall too and will ultimately cause the death of GM
Posted by grassman on Apr. 10 2015,10:33 am
(Botto 82 @ Apr. 10 2015,6:50 am)
QUOTE
(grassman @ Apr. 10 2015,6:19 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 10 2015,4:42 am)
QUOTE
^^are their accountants that good or is the IRS told from on high to treat them with kid gloves?
They are just following the business model provided by their whores in Washington.
Exactly.
Remember when this country made things, and the rich paid their fair share, and the middle class wielded incredible buying power and the country as a whole prospered?
It all started to go downhill when Reagan became President, and Roger Smith was running GM into the ground.
Republicans and business have always chanted for government to get out of their way so they could prosper. Did that mean to pave the way for getting out of paying taxes? You have the poor that don't pay taxes. (can't get blood out of a turnip). You have Big Business and Billionaires and Millionaires who get the least amount of withholding ever. Who does that leave to pay the piper? It's about time everyone gets their head out of the sand and take a look around at who is screwing whom! In the meantime they take advantage of the enviroment for a buck.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 10 2015,10:46 am
Now who is it that's chair person of the president council on jobs and competitiveness???I wonder
Posted by grassman on Apr. 10 2015,10:58 am
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 10 2015,10:46 am)
QUOTE
Now who is it that's chair person of the president council on jobs and competitiveness???
I wonder
I wonder
It does not matter, they are all the same now. This did not just happen yesterday. Good Grief.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 10 2015,1:15 pm
(grassman @ Apr. 10 2015,10:58 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 10 2015,10:46 am)
QUOTE
Now who is it that's chair person of the president council on jobs and competitiveness???
I wonder
I wonder
It does not matter, they are all the same now. This did not just happen yesterday. Good Grief.
This does matter, this is my point(probably made too often but so be it) Republican-Democrat, there's no difference anymore and hasn't been for a long time.
Posted by Marneman on Apr. 13 2015,4:22 am
"It all started to go downhill when Reagan became President, and Roger Smith was running GM into the ground."You know everyone like to blame Regan for all the stuff that went wrong in the 80's, but they seem to overlook the Democratic controlled congress led by "Tip" O'Neal. I know Regan wasn't perfect (I know some people think he was!), but you can't blame him for everything.
Posted by alcitizens on Apr. 14 2015,3:59 am
Half of the top 20 cities in the world with the highest levels of Air Pollution were in India.< http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/08/world/asia/india-pollution-who/ >
< View on YouTube >
Posted by Expatriate on Apr. 14 2015,6:24 am
(Marneman @ Apr. 13 2015,4:22 am)
QUOTE
"It all started to go downhill when Reagan became President, and Roger Smith was running GM into the ground."
You know everyone like to blame Regan for all the stuff that went wrong in the 80's, but they seem to overlook the Democratic controlled congress led by "Tip" O'Neal. I know Regan wasn't perfect (I know some people think he was!), but you can't blame him for everything.
You know everyone like to blame Regan for all the stuff that went wrong in the 80's, but they seem to overlook the Democratic controlled congress led by "Tip" O'Neal. I know Regan wasn't perfect (I know some people think he was!), but you can't blame him for everything.
By the end of his term, 138 Reagan administration officials had been convicted, had been indicted, or had been the subject of official investigations for official misconduct and/or criminal violations.
In terms of number of officials involved, the record of his administration was the worst ever. I believe Nixon only had eight staffers convicted of crimes against their office.
Posted by Botto 82 on Apr. 14 2015,6:56 am
(Marneman @ Apr. 13 2015,4:22 am)
QUOTE
"It all started to go downhill when Reagan became President, and Roger Smith was running GM into the ground."
You know everyone like to blame Regan for all the stuff that went wrong in the 80's, but they seem to overlook the Democratic controlled congress led by "Tip" O'Neal. I know Regan wasn't perfect (I know some people think he was!), but you can't blame him for everything.
You know everyone like to blame Regan for all the stuff that went wrong in the 80's, but they seem to overlook the Democratic controlled congress led by "Tip" O'Neal. I know Regan wasn't perfect (I know some people think he was!), but you can't blame him for everything.
I'm guessing that your misspelling of Reagan's name was an accident, but it's more telling than you know. During the Reagan Years (capitalization, mine) Don Regan shaped fiscal policy more than you know.
Posted by alcitizens on Apr. 15 2015,2:57 am
(Botto 82 @ Apr. 14 2015,6:56 am)
QUOTE
I'm guessing that your misspelling of Reagan's name was an accident, but it's more telling than you know. During the Reagan Years (capitalization, mine) Don Regan shaped fiscal policy more than you know.
I'm guessing that you don't realize spelling is not an issue here.. I can still make my point by saying u r f'ed up in de hed..
Posted by grassman on Apr. 25 2015,8:21 am
Now what? How Human Activity Is Causing Earthquakes Across the United States
Time
Justin Worland 15 hrs ago
The Rock may be about to star in the earthquake disaster movie San Andreas, but it turns out California is no longer the leading state for quakes. Oklahoma had more than 500 earthquakes of magnitude 3.0 or greater in 2014. Quakes in the Sooner State are now hundreds of times more common than less than a decade ago.
And Oklahoma is not alone. Eight states in the South and Central U.S. are experiencing rapid earthquake growth as a result human activity, according to a new report from the United States Geological Survey (USGS).
“These earthquakes are occurring at a higher rate than ever before and pose a much greater risk to people living nearby," said Mark Petersen, a USGS official.
The man-made Oklahoma earthquakes are a relatively new phenomenon, the consequence of oil and gas drillers who have taken advantage of the fracking revolution injecting billions of gallons of wastewater underground. The increase in earthquake activity began in 2009, but the Oklahoma state government only acknowledged the role of oil and gas activity for the first time this week.
Energy producers often need to dispose of polluted waste underground to prevent contamination of freshwater. Researchers have suggested that the disposal of drilling wastewater deep underground may increase the stress on fault lines as far as 6 miles away, and subsequently trigger earthquakes.
Thus far, most of the Oklahoma earthquakes have been relatively small. But recent research suggests that bigger quakes may be on the horizon as a result of the reactivation of a 300-million-year-old fault line in the middle of the country, according to a study published Thursday.
The damage caused by even a moderately-sized earthquake in Oklahoma would likely be greater than in a state like California–Oklahoma lacks the tougher building codes that are common in states accustomed to quakes. A 5.6 magnitude earthquake, considered moderate in most places that typically experience earthquakes, rocked the state in 2011. More than a dozen homes were destroyed, and two highways buckled.
The Oklahoma state government said this week that it will take action to prepare for more man-made earthquakes, and launched a website to explain the problem to residents.
Other states experiencing human-induced earthquakes include Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Ohio, and Texas, according to the USGS.
Previous research has suggested that fracking, a controversial process of oil and gas extraction that involves opening up fractures in shale rock deep underground, may be in part directly responsible for some of these earthquakes, but the USGS says that the process is only "occasionally the direct cause of felt earthquakes." Wastewater injection is a more common cause.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on May 23 2015,10:50 am
Botto:QUOTE
This is off the thread topic, so I'll be brief. Roz, I feel your pain, though my involvement with these people was mercifully brief. They are self-justifying, knee-jerk-reaction-having overfunded morons who treat each and every case they encounter as some potential worst-case scenario, and often end up doing more harm than good, all at taxpayers' expense. It was a satisfying moment when I threw them out of my daughter's life for good. Again, I'm sorry you had/have to endure them.
Tim Engstrom agrees with you, and he specifically mentions Freeborn County workers in this article:
< http://www.albertleatribune.com/2014...parents >
I'm glad you didn't have to deal with them long. Our dealings with them were immediately over after I started showing people our file.
Grassman::
QUOTE
Wastewater injection is a more common cause
Maybe they can do with fracking water like they've been doing in California for 20 years with used oil drilling water. Let the company tell regulators what chemicals they use, have the companies do their own tests, or let them pick their own third-party lab and when the drilling companies deem the water is safe, let them sell it to farmers for watering crops. Three birds, one stone. Companies don't have to worry about what to do with their waste, no injection wells, plenty of fresh clean water for farmers.
(Just in case that icon is actually needed to clarify my position for anyone)
Posted by alcitizens on May 31 2015,10:09 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ May 23 2015,10:50 am)
QUOTE
Tim Engstrom agrees with you, and he specifically mentions Freeborn County workers in this article:
< http://www.albertleatribune.com/2014...parents >
< http://www.albertleatribune.com/2014...parents >
That has to be one of the best reads I've had in a long time.. I agreed with Tim Engstrom from beginning to end..
Its off topic but would make for a good topic.. I swear that I've been saying for 20 years that the parks around town are always empty.. Something just isn't right..
Kids need to get out and be kids away from adults and electronics.. There were very few fat kids when I was growing up.. We were told to go play and go where we wanted to, on foot or on bikes..
Posted by MADDOG on Nov. 06 2015,9:14 am
QUOTE
Oct. 30, 2015
< NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses >
A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.
The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.
According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.
“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”
Scientists calculate how much the ice sheet is growing or shrinking from the changes in surface height that are measured by the satellite altimeters. In locations where the amount of new snowfall accumulating on an ice sheet is not equal to the ice flow downward and outward to the ocean, the surface height changes and the ice-sheet mass grows or shrinks.
But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”
The study analyzed changes in the surface height of the Antarctic ice sheet measured by radar altimeters on two European Space Agency European Remote Sensing (ERS) satellites, spanning from 1992 to 2001, and by the laser altimeter on NASA’s Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) from 2003 to 2008.
Zwally said that while other scientists have assumed that the gains in elevation seen in East Antarctica are due to recent increases in snow accumulation, his team used meteorological data beginning in 1979 to show that the snowfall in East Antarctica actually decreased by 11 billion tons per year during both the ERS and ICESat periods. They also used information on snow accumulation for tens of thousands of years, derived by other scientists from ice cores, to conclude that East Antarctica has been thickening for a very long time.
“At the end of the last Ice Age, the air became warmer and carried more moisture across the continent, doubling the amount of snow dropped on the ice sheet,” Zwally said.
The extra snowfall that began 10,000 years ago has been slowly accumulating on the ice sheet and compacting into solid ice over millennia, thickening the ice in East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica by an average of 0.7 inches (1.7 centimeters) per year. This small thickening, sustained over thousands of years and spread over the vast expanse of these sectors of Antarctica, corresponds to a very large gain of ice – enough to outweigh the losses from fast-flowing glaciers in other parts of the continent and reduce global sea level rise.
Zwally’s team calculated that the mass gain from the thickening of East Antarctica remained steady from 1992 to 2008 at 200 billion tons per year, while the ice losses from the coastal regions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula increased by 65 billion tons per year.
“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”
“The new study highlights the difficulties of measuring the small changes in ice height happening in East Antarctica,” said Ben Smith, a glaciologist with the University of Washington in Seattle who was not involved in Zwally’s study.
"Doing altimetry accurately for very large areas is extraordinarily difficult, and there are measurements of snow accumulation that need to be done independently to understand what’s happening in these places,” Smith said.
To help accurately measure changes in Antarctica, NASA is developing the successor to the ICESat mission, ICESat-2, which is scheduled to launch in 2018. “ICESat-2 will measure changes in the ice sheet within the thickness of a No. 2 pencil,” said Tom Neumann, a glaciologist at Goddard and deputy project scientist for ICESat-2. “It will contribute to solving the problem of Antarctica’s mass balance by providing a long-term record of elevation changes.”
< NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses >
A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.
The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.
According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.
“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”
Scientists calculate how much the ice sheet is growing or shrinking from the changes in surface height that are measured by the satellite altimeters. In locations where the amount of new snowfall accumulating on an ice sheet is not equal to the ice flow downward and outward to the ocean, the surface height changes and the ice-sheet mass grows or shrinks.
But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”
The study analyzed changes in the surface height of the Antarctic ice sheet measured by radar altimeters on two European Space Agency European Remote Sensing (ERS) satellites, spanning from 1992 to 2001, and by the laser altimeter on NASA’s Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) from 2003 to 2008.
Zwally said that while other scientists have assumed that the gains in elevation seen in East Antarctica are due to recent increases in snow accumulation, his team used meteorological data beginning in 1979 to show that the snowfall in East Antarctica actually decreased by 11 billion tons per year during both the ERS and ICESat periods. They also used information on snow accumulation for tens of thousands of years, derived by other scientists from ice cores, to conclude that East Antarctica has been thickening for a very long time.
“At the end of the last Ice Age, the air became warmer and carried more moisture across the continent, doubling the amount of snow dropped on the ice sheet,” Zwally said.
The extra snowfall that began 10,000 years ago has been slowly accumulating on the ice sheet and compacting into solid ice over millennia, thickening the ice in East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica by an average of 0.7 inches (1.7 centimeters) per year. This small thickening, sustained over thousands of years and spread over the vast expanse of these sectors of Antarctica, corresponds to a very large gain of ice – enough to outweigh the losses from fast-flowing glaciers in other parts of the continent and reduce global sea level rise.
Zwally’s team calculated that the mass gain from the thickening of East Antarctica remained steady from 1992 to 2008 at 200 billion tons per year, while the ice losses from the coastal regions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula increased by 65 billion tons per year.
“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”
“The new study highlights the difficulties of measuring the small changes in ice height happening in East Antarctica,” said Ben Smith, a glaciologist with the University of Washington in Seattle who was not involved in Zwally’s study.
"Doing altimetry accurately for very large areas is extraordinarily difficult, and there are measurements of snow accumulation that need to be done independently to understand what’s happening in these places,” Smith said.
To help accurately measure changes in Antarctica, NASA is developing the successor to the ICESat mission, ICESat-2, which is scheduled to launch in 2018. “ICESat-2 will measure changes in the ice sheet within the thickness of a No. 2 pencil,” said Tom Neumann, a glaciologist at Goddard and deputy project scientist for ICESat-2. “It will contribute to solving the problem of Antarctica’s mass balance by providing a long-term record of elevation changes.”
Looks like we have another 20-30 years some didn't think we had. Looks like the ice went south for the winter.
Posted by grassman on Feb. 05 2016,5:40 am
Study: Oil field operations caused California earthquakes For the first time, scientists have reported that the underground disposal of waste water from oil drilling has probably triggered earthquakes in California, a problem already rattling nerves in Oklahoma and other states.
Researchers on Thursday tied a September 2005 swarm of moderate earthquakes in Kern County to three waste water disposal wells nearby. The wells opened between 2001 and 2005, rapidly increasing the amount of waste water stored underground near the White Wolf fault.
The research paper, published by the American Geophysical Union, could not prove with absolute certainty that the waste water injections caused the quakes. Earthquake swarms, such as the one that hit San Ramon last fall, are hardly unusual in California. But the authors calculated only a 3 percent chance that the Kern County swarm was mere coincidence.
The study also does not offer any indication of how common such human-induced quakes may be in California. "However, considering the numerous active faults in California, the seismogenic consequences of even a few induced cases can be devastating, the authors note.
America's recent oil production boom created a strange sideeffect of earthquakes shaking places that rarely felt them before.In 2015, for example, Oklahoma experienced 907 quakes larger than magnitude 3. Prior to 2008, the state averaged just two similarly sized quakes per year.
Scientists fixed the blame on injection wells, once considered the most environmentally responsible way for oil companies to deal with their waste water.
Oil wells typically bring to the surface large amounts of mineral-laced water mixed with petroleum. Once separated from the oil, the water can either be treated for reuse, dumped into evaporation ponds or pumped back underground for disposal. As injection wells pump large volumes of water back underground — often into different rock formations than it came from, they can change the pressure within the rocks, making faults more likely to slip.
The emergence of hydraulic fracturing, which uses high pressure water to crack underground rocks, has produced even more oil-field water that needs disposal.
Waste water injection wells can pose other problems. As detailed in a Chronicle investigation last year, California regulators for years let oil companies inject their waste water into relatively high-quality aquifers that were supposed to be protected bylaw.
California ranks as America's third largest oil producing state, and one of its most seismically active. Many of California's oilfields — along with their injection wells lie close to active faults, including the San Andreas. But California's frequent,naturally occurring quakes make it difficult for researchers to spot temblors that may have been triggered, at least in part, by human activity.
Scientists had previously tied quakes to underground injections of water into California's geothermal energy fields, but not to injections of oil-field waste water.
"You do have these swarms popping up unexpectedly in random places, said the research paper's lead author, Thomas Goebel, with UC Santa Cruz. "So we tried to be as rigorous as possible."
The quakes included in the new study, which struck near the Central Valley's southern edge, weren't large, with the most powerful registering magnitude 4.7. But injection wells have been linked elsewhere to quakes as large as magnitude 5.6, Goebel said.
"These are quakes that can be felt and can cause damage," said Shaye Wolf, climate science director for the Center for Biological Diversity environmental group. Her organization in 2014 issued astudy that counted 350 injection wells in California within 5 miles of an active fault.
"There probably have been other earthquakes induced by waste water injection that haven't been documented, just because no one looked,"Wolf said.
California's oil field regulating agency the Division of Oil,Gas and Geothermal Resources is trying to get a sense of how prevalent the problem may be, a spokesman said Thursday. The agency has commissioned Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory to study the issue.
The results of this study will aid in permitting and regulating future waste water injection operations in the state,said division spokesman Don Drysdale.
David R. Baker is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer.E-mail: dbaker@sfchronicle.com Twitter:@DavidBakerS
This just can't be right. Hasn't the argument been, that there is just too much regulation?
California is in a serious drought and yet they take the chance of destroying what ground water they do have.