Support Iceshanty... Get some great gear and forum goodies... Join The Iceshanty Hardwater Militia
i know the winter in western ny have been getting warmer and shorter since the 70s.i think its a combination of both man made and natural it probably would happen without us but we are defiantly speeding it up.don't think we can stop it now but it doesn't hurt to try
Okay, let's follow the money. Let's say working to clean this mess up costs billions. Who gets the money? Enterprising greenies who create and use science and technology to counter the effects of GW. Everyone from the recycling sorters picking through our garbage all the way up to the venture capitalists investing in new technologies like solar and wind, and alternative fuels. Looking at the automotive industry as an example, we will see the price of cars increasing due to fuel efficiency mandates. That extra money we will pay(and have paid in the past) goes for the research and development of the necessary technologies as well as the extra material and labor for production. Money spent in the system. We also require safety mandates which effect prices similarly. Seatbelts, Airbags, crash absorbing crumple zones are all the norm today. And there are also market forces involved which increase costs which we gladly pay. Who really needs a 300 hp sedan? Why won't we ever see crank windows again? So yea, the cost is gonna climb, but the money goes into the economy. I'd rather see it working within the economy than being deposited in Big Oil's savings accounts. And really, do they put it back in? I pity the fool who believes that that segment of the free market is money deservedly earned or reinvested.Huge changes will rock our economy as they have in the past. Maybe we have to re regulate or even nationalize parts of the energy industry in order to compete in the world. Maybe we'll have to sacrifice our lifestyle choices such as recreation and commuting to work. For sure, the planet's finite resources are being used by a growing population in ways that are not good for the ecosystem. If we can find some economic impetus to counteract this negative, then all the better.
Al Gore getting rich off of greenhouse gas credits? Is this as reported by Rush Limbaugh? I've not heard this one. But lets suppose this is correct. We know world leaders will not act on ANYTHING without someone pocketing billions. For example, Cheney making his Halli-bur-ton cronies and himself billions, while our brothers and sisters die in Iraq. Bu$h making his cronies richer and richer with $4.00 a gallon gas. Record profits for Exxon. Now there is Al making billions off of -gasp- trying to clean up the environment? How dare he? Maybe its bad just because he's a democrat. If he was a republican, would getting richer be okay? Is it just a bipartisan thing? Whether you believe in GW or not the simple fact is these are finite resources we are using up at an astounding rate. The planet cannot sustain this. As for the romans and native peoples using up as many resources as modern man, I mean are you serious? In 100AD there were 200 million people on the planet using rocks and sticks. There are six BILLION people on earth now. Consuming staggering amounts of anything and everything we can get our hands on. Six billion. In the last 100 years we've added 4.4 billion consumers. Burning energy in ways unimaginable just 100 years ago. Nonstop. Burn baby burn. This has to affect something. Maybe this warming trend is cyclical. But somewhere, sometime we have to at least start to think about consequences. Somebody has to start this dialogue sometime. Do you really think we can consume like this forever?
Are you serious??? You use this as an arguement??? So just because you have not heard of it means no credibility exists? You aboviously know very little about Truth in Broadcasting with Rush or how to verify what is said on the show so do a tad of homework on these subjects and you shall see.Bill Clinton also used Haliburton for no bid contracts as they are one of the only companies in the world with credentials capable of performing many of the jobs they are contracted for. Does that make Bill Clinton guilty as well?George Bush is causing us to pay 4.00 a gallon?? He is not OPEC, he is not controlling China and India wherto 2000 cars a day are being added to the road. It has to do with simple economics ice. Supplyt and demand. 8% profits reports from oil copanies is about the same as most industries. But when you sell a ton more on the global market, then profits will increase, but not necessarily the profit margins. We are dependent upon foreign oil; and the global market not because George is President, but because the Democratic party has cowtowed to special interest groups for 30 years, and that does not help our jobs, economy or anything else. What it does is place a moratorium on desperately needed new refineries, pipelines and drilling projects. It stamps out our ability to use nuclear energy like many other countries safely, and instead rely on other polluting fossil fuels. Since we built our last reactor, France has added in the neighborhood of 70+ reactors, nearly without incident. But the democrats have stifled our ability to drill, in the area between Cuba and USA for years, and now the Chineese and Venezuelans are tapping the oil we could have been for decades. The worlds second largest deposit of oil is in anwar, yet the democrats refuse to allow it to be tapped, they refuse new pipelines. The democrats have created our dependency upon foreign oil, and therefore are rsponsible for us paying almost 4.00 a barrell.Then the feel good politics of the democrats want us and are tryig to force us into alternative fuels like ethynol from corn, which pollutes more in the production process than does gas from oil in the entire process. Now those democratic efforts have resulted in shortages of corn on the market causing us to over pay for milk, pork, beef and any other product from the farm as the farmers are paying up to 4 fold for a bushell!! And that cost is passed onto the consumers. The statements by Hillary that she will "Go after the oil companies" should scare the bejebus out of you, not make you feel good. That will have even further reachiing reprocussions that we all will pay for. Again, the democrats created our dependency through their refusal to allow us to drill, explore, tap and build...and they still refuse, but blame Bush??? Time to wake up and smell the coffee eh???
rl,with all due respect, are you saying we should say screwit, grab all we can, use up everything within our grasp whether we need it or not, to heck with the next 1000 generations, cause if we don't use the chinese or some one else will?it seems to me you have the mentality of someone who would keep all of the fish they catch, every day, eat until you're sick, and let the rest rot- just so your neighbors' kids can't get them.i'm not saying your facts are incorrect, i 'm saying i strongly disagree with your point of view.thats my opinion.
up here it did not get cold this year till mid jan.it used to get cold in oct.did not need my furnace till almost feb.so if i factor in this year the trend continuesThe speeding up just took a big dump when you factor in this year. All warming trends for the past short 100 years have been washed away that quick. This is one of the many reasons why it was a fleecing of America for Al to only use a few short years as his basis. Had he used a longer period of time the warming trend would not have been there, but it would have instead been a cyclical action.Imagine run-away savanah fires, forest fires and swamp fires that use to burn for years on end...imagine tens of millions of bon fires burning raw coal, wood etc around the clock to fuel the war machines of the Romans and all the other civilizations on the globe like the Hunns, Incas, Aztecs, Mayans, Toltecs and on and on and on. These civilizations nearly wiped out the wood and resources available to fuel the fires required for survival. Cookining, warmth and tool making. The amount of CO2 put into the air was astronomical. Now fires are doused in days or weeks, not years. Fire breaks contain many fires, and brush and forests are removed from much of the land scape and swamps have dried up by being pumped or drained out.These civilizations burned raw fuels with no controls what so ever. All sewage ended up untreated. There were very little to no controls back then for pollution. And yet seas dried up in some places, glaciers formed in others, and receeded elsewhere. The land bridge between Russia and Alaska did not melt down in the last 100 years.....more like tens of thousands ago. But we were not civilized man yet, so are we to blame for what has been happening all along? or is it a convenient lie?Do we know if we indeed are polluting more now than the old civilizations use to?Imagine the amount of livestock and horses required just to maintain the Roman empire or Dynasties??? CO2 deposits in glacier ice and sediments have indicated levels at times in the past higher than what we have today. One active volcano can change the atmosphere for decades to come, as can one asteroid impact.
Yes the environment. RLW just focused on the Dem vs Rep paragraph of my post. I wasn't trying to say one was better than the other. My point was that at some point in time we have to start thinking about turning our slash and burn tendencies around. Common sense dictates this. So anyone who suggests we look at this issue is a feel good liberal? Shall we all just bury our head in the sand and ignore it? Keep using and it will get better?
