April 1, 2009 at 11:52 am #31091
Here’s seemingly conclusive proof that man made global warming is a hoax, or at best a misinterpretation of scientific data. This is the best piece I’ve read on the subject.
Note: this doesn’t diminish my support for green initiatives or even for a reduction in CO2, which rising levels of has caused major damage to coral reefs and threatens oceans. This is a completely different topic than global warming, however.
-MichaelApril 1, 2009 at 10:24 pm #31092
I am hoping we will shift to a goal of trying to become adaptable, aka do not build your house below or right at sea level in the path of hurricanes. That would be a start. 🙂April 2, 2009 at 2:04 am #31094
I did not read all of the article. (Sidenote: there is a donation button at the bottom. Maybe they are a little biased???)
Every issue will have both sides and both will be ‘convincing’ but only one will be right in the end. I have to go with the simple thought, the Earth is a closed environment like a bubble. The natural environment can mitigate some increase in carbon dioxide levels naturally. But using simple math, the more carbon dioxide producing objects ie cars, factories, people, etc. which is increasing ALL THE TIME the more carbon dioxide there is. The more carbon dioxide, the more heat trapped. We may NOT YET have surpassed temperature levels of past but at the current rate we will and eventually it will be too late. (There are some promising technologies being developed to decrease CO2 in the air.)
An experience I would like to share: I was in Hong Kong and China in the early 90’s and the skys were clear and blue. Three years ago I flew from Beijing to Hong Kong and there was smog the WHOLE F***** WAY!!! I got off the plane in HK once going and returning to change planes and I couldn’t believe it, the pollution was bad even in HK which is far south on the ocean.
Here is an excerpt fron a WSJ article, “On some days, almost a third of the air over Los Angeles and San Francisco can be traced directly to Asia. With it comes up to three-quarters of the black carbon particulate pollution that reaches the West Coast, Dr. Ramanathan and his colleagues recently reported in the Journal of Geophysical Research.”
You can google china air pollution for more info.
Peace.April 2, 2009 at 6:25 am #31096
I have not read the article at all because I don’t feel like reading right now, so no comments on the content either.
Just sharing the day to day reality in my tiny country on the European continent.
Being very happy the sun is finally shining for a couple of days, with the sun the trouble with Particulate Matter will appear too. Whole of Europe and especially the big cities and unfortunately also the whole region I live in is covered with the stuff for months and months. In summer when there is little to no wind we are not allowed to drive cars more than 60km/hour, to minimalize the pollution.
Along the roads there are signs everywhere saying SMOG 60.
In 80 big cities in Europe they have a green zone, which means you are not allowed to drive your car in the city between 6.30am and 6.30 pm, if you do, you have to pay for it. That way they try to reduce the pollution by cars.
Some cities like Athens you can drive depending on your drivers plate. Of course smart asses buy two cars with different numbers so they can drive cars on both days.
Just to say it are humans though who are driving those cars, using the factories for their supplies and goods…
And no matter breathing Particulate Matter is deadly, the smaller the particals the deadlier, the smallest ones come from cars. In Europe a part of the cars and especially all the trucks run on ‘diesel’, which are the worst pollutors and have the smallest particals.
Clean cars are some sollution and in summer I have a device in my house that captures the particals but like for my middle daughter being in hot weather and being physical outside, needing more oxygen, she has trouble to breath and the more ozon in the air the more difficult she can breath, with chestpain and nausea.
On bad (polluted) hot days it is better for her to stay inside the house and not be physical too much.
Also the development of lungs of children are effected by this sort of pollution, resulting in allergies and astma, there is a real explosion of children and young people having allergies, eczema and astma.
So I don’t need to look at China to know that we are in trouble, man made trouble.
Even in Western Europe where people are more aware, politicians are inventing all sort of rules and laws to stop the pollution, we can not close the borders above our heads, we can not stop the winds of blowing over the mountains and sees, that became painfully clear when in Chernobyl (USSR) the nuclear reactor exploded, driving the outfall over Europe where we were no longer allowed to eat our self grown vegetables from the garden.
Living more closely together in Europe I guess we are more painfully aware of the effects we have on each other and are more committed to work together to do something about it.
The more outer space countries seem to have the less they believe there is a man made problem.
My day to day simple live tells me that we either work together and change for the better or we stay selfish and narrow minded and create hell on earth for all of us.April 2, 2009 at 3:16 pm #31098
I’ve never quite understood why some people do things
like live in Hurricane Alley, on the Mississippi Flood Plain,
or on the San Andreas Fault Line. While I don’t necessarily
enjoy seeing people’s lives ruined, homes destroyed, etc.,
I feel that some of these tragedies are sort of their own
doing due to stupid choices.April 2, 2009 at 3:31 pm #31100
>>>Every issue will have both sides and
>>>both will be ‘convincing’ but only one
>>>will be right in the end.
To those in the global warming debate:
Why is this the case?
The problem I see with both sides of the debate
is that each is thinking that the other side is wrong.
Has anyone ever considered that the planet is
warming due to a COMBINATION of natural effects
AND man-made effects? . . . that the Earth
IS warming naturally, but it is also being aggravated
by human negligence to the environment?
Why does it have to be either-or?
Anyone fixated on one narrow side has blinders up
in my opinion. OF COURSE, the sun is contributing.
OF COURSE, we as a people are contributing. What
else could it really be?
Then, regardless of what percent our contribution to
global warming is, we should take steps to minimize
our destructive impact on the environment . . . for
no other reason than it’s simply a good idea. THEN
having acted in good conscience, submit and surrender
ourselves to the Tao, and let whatever will be, be.
SApril 5, 2009 at 12:17 pm #31102
What are peoples feelings about the emotions behind the concepts that humans are the main cause and the dominate push for this in the media?April 5, 2009 at 2:26 pm #31104
>>>What are peoples feelings about the emotions
>>>behind the concepts that humans are the main
>>>cause and the dominate push for this in the media?
Probably a latent frustration response to perceived apathy
that many believe the “sheep-minded” populace tends to have,
i.e. a reaction to irresponsible, wasteful, consumer-driven,
hedonistic living with no regard to the consequences of the
reckless actions taken. That is, an attempt by those
frustrated by such behavior to use shock and awe to try
to say “wake up” to those that perpetuate such behavior.
In essence, to try to get people, who primarily have
self-centered views, to try to get them to consider their
actions in relation to the collective. You might even
extrapolate it to mean that it is an unconscious desire
to get the masses to raise their level of consciousness, by
causing them to bring their awareness beyond the “egotistical me”.
All in all, I consider it a good thing.
If it turns out that humans play a large role in climate change,
then the motivated changes by such attention is beneficial for
continued physical life here. If, on the other hand, it
turns out that humans play a small or relatively negligible
role in climate change, the changes taken by green initiatives
will nonetheless improve local environments while simultaneously
helping to bring more of a mindfulness into the consciousness of
everyday living (i.e. consciousness raises as a side-effect).
SApril 6, 2009 at 10:04 am #31106
After Fusion I have become very self centered.:) If you are not centered in your self where are you? So is that it just a loving Shepard with the compassion to lie to us for our own good. Any one else care to share. No right or wrong answer.April 6, 2009 at 10:45 am #31108
>>>After Fusion I have become very self centered.:)
>>>If you are not centered in your self where are you?
Oh, come on. Don’t be a smart ass 🙂
There’s a difference between being ego-centric/thinking
only of your needs vs. wanting to uplift others as you
uplift yourself from a stable center.
Why do you want to be a HT instructor after all?
SApril 6, 2009 at 12:30 pm #31110
haha, all kidding aside I totally understand your meaning of self. I do disagree with the good Sheppard and there attempts to externalize the collective (more shallowness), instead of centering or merging with the collective heart of humanity with in.April 12, 2009 at 11:42 pm #31112
You are confusing the issue of human pollution – which is very real – with the issue of global warming.
The nano-motor I’ve invested in may go a long ways to changing that – it offers a powerful electric motor at low cost.
michaelApril 13, 2009 at 11:32 pm #31114
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.