If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Kris Krieger on June 30, 2007, 11:16 pm
> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>> It's not rock, paper, scissors:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/35x68k
>>
>>
>> "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting
>> into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries,
>> likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to
>> plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue
>> well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a
>> priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is
>> the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada."
>>
>> I knew it was too good to be true.
>>
>
> I'm more concerned with environmental degradation than anything.
> If the politics are such that they make global warming an excuse for
> correcting global degradation, then I might be cool with that and warm
> up to any plans in that regard.
>
I agree. Pollutants cause various sorts of damage to biological organisms,
and clear, uncontravertical evidence of this damage is showing up in both
animals and humans.
It's extremely irritating (no pun intendd) when people use denials of
global warming as some sort of license to spew pollutants willy-nilly into
the air, water, and ground. Animal popultions are the proverbial "canary
in the coal mine", and people's **choice** to trivialize animal indicators
is only coming back to harm their own children - and, as they age and
become more susceptable to pollutants, themselves as well. But then all
they do is whine and cry about how 'the governemnt" should have done
"something" or should do "something" - as long as they don't have to bear
any of the burden for problems they themselves created.
Global Warming is, in many ways, a diversion from the immediate
consequences of pollution. It's become a sound-bite substitute for
pollution issues - people who want to place their own immediate profit (or
lazyassedness, or whatever) over even their own, and their children's,
halth, now use the cry "Global warming is a sham" to justify the poisoning
of any and every environment (which inevitably ends up meaning, Anyplace
where humans can live).
You'd think people would be smart enough to try to preserve thier own, and
their children's and grandchildren's, health and wuality of life - but,
Nope, they're too stupid to do even that.
|
|
Posted by Michael Bulatovich on July 1, 2007, 10:30 am
>
>> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>> It's not rock, paper, scissors:
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/35x68k
>>>
>>>
>>> "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting
>>> into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries,
>>> likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to
>>> plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue
>>> well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a
>>> priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is
>>> the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada."
>>>
>>> I knew it was too good to be true.
>>>
>>
>> I'm more concerned with environmental degradation than anything.
>> If the politics are such that they make global warming an excuse for
>> correcting global degradation, then I might be cool with that and warm
>> up to any plans in that regard.
>>
>
> I agree. Pollutants cause various sorts of damage to biological
> organisms,
> and clear, uncontravertical evidence of this damage is showing up in both
> animals and humans.
>
> It's extremely irritating (no pun intendd) when people use denials of
> global warming as some sort of license to spew pollutants willy-nilly into
> the air, water, and ground. Animal popultions are the proverbial "canary
> in the coal mine", and people's **choice** to trivialize animal indicators
> is only coming back to harm their own children - and, as they age and
> become more susceptable to pollutants, themselves as well. But then all
> they do is whine and cry about how 'the governemnt" should have done
> "something" or should do "something" - as long as they don't have to bear
> any of the burden for problems they themselves created.
>
> Global Warming is, in many ways, a diversion from the immediate
> consequences of pollution. It's become a sound-bite substitute for
> pollution issues
The current Canadian government spent the first 6 months of its mandate try
to play a shell game with pollution and carbon emissions being
interchangeable...as if the water wasn't murky enough.
--
MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca
|
|
Posted by =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Se=F1or_Popcorn on July 3, 2007, 9:45 pm
Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>
>>> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>>> It's not rock, paper, scissors:
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/35x68k
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting
>>>> into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries,
>>>> likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to
>>>> plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue
>>>> well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a
>>>> priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is
>>>> the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada."
>>>>
>>>> I knew it was too good to be true.
>>>>
>>> I'm more concerned with environmental degradation than anything.
>>> If the politics are such that they make global warming an excuse for
>>> correcting global degradation, then I might be cool with that and warm
>>> up to any plans in that regard.
>>>
>> I agree. Pollutants cause various sorts of damage to biological
>> organisms,
>> and clear, uncontravertical evidence of this damage is showing up in both
>> animals and humans.
>>
>> It's extremely irritating (no pun intendd) when people use denials of
>> global warming as some sort of license to spew pollutants willy-nilly into
>> the air, water, and ground. Animal popultions are the proverbial "canary
>> in the coal mine", and people's **choice** to trivialize animal indicators
>> is only coming back to harm their own children - and, as they age and
>> become more susceptable to pollutants, themselves as well. But then all
>> they do is whine and cry about how 'the governemnt" should have done
>> "something" or should do "something" - as long as they don't have to bear
>> any of the burden for problems they themselves created.
>>
>> Global Warming is, in many ways, a diversion from the immediate
>> consequences of pollution. It's become a sound-bite substitute for
>> pollution issues
>
> The current Canadian government spent the first 6 months of its mandate try
> to play a shell game with pollution and carbon emissions being
> interchangeable...as if the water wasn't murky enough.
I was surprised to see our current gov't get elected.
I also have a hard time with members crossing over to another party or
with party mergers.
|
|
Posted by Michael Bulatovich on July 4, 2007, 8:35 am
> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>>>> It's not rock, paper, scissors:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/35x68k
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting
>>>>> into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries,
>>>>> likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to
>>>>> plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue
>>>>> well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a
>>>>> priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is
>>>>> the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada."
>>>>>
>>>>> I knew it was too good to be true.
>>>>>
>>>> I'm more concerned with environmental degradation than anything.
>>>> If the politics are such that they make global warming an excuse for
>>>> correcting global degradation, then I might be cool with that and warm
>>>> up to any plans in that regard.
>>>>
>>> I agree. Pollutants cause various sorts of damage to biological
>>> organisms,
>>> and clear, uncontravertical evidence of this damage is showing up in
>>> both
>>> animals and humans.
>>>
>>> It's extremely irritating (no pun intendd) when people use denials of
>>> global warming as some sort of license to spew pollutants willy-nilly
>>> into
>>> the air, water, and ground. Animal popultions are the proverbial
>>> "canary
>>> in the coal mine", and people's **choice** to trivialize animal
>>> indicators
>>> is only coming back to harm their own children - and, as they age and
>>> become more susceptable to pollutants, themselves as well. But then all
>>> they do is whine and cry about how 'the governemnt" should have done
>>> "something" or should do "something" - as long as they don't have to
>>> bear
>>> any of the burden for problems they themselves created.
>>>
>>> Global Warming is, in many ways, a diversion from the immediate
>>> consequences of pollution. It's become a sound-bite substitute for
>>> pollution issues
>>
>> The current Canadian government spent the first 6 months of its mandate
>> try to play a shell game with pollution and carbon emissions being
>> interchangeable...as if the water wasn't murky enough.
>
> I was surprised to see our current gov't get elected.
> I also have a hard time with members crossing over to another party or
> with party mergers.
The parliamentary system is pretty dysfunctional, but who's going to get
constitutional reform on the agenda?
In what province are you? Ontario is gearing up for a fall election.... Now
that we (A2A/OAA) beat the government (on Bill 124) I and my minion don't
have to go and spend our time trying to defeat the Attorney General in his
home riding like we were planning on doing. The liberals look vulnerable,
but, despite a new leader, the tories are still associated with Mike Harris
and Walkerton. The NDP, well....that won't happen until we hate the liberals
way more.
I'm starting to think that minorities might be our equivalent of the
America's 'checks and balances'.... a good thing.
--
MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca
|
|
Posted by Edgar on July 2, 2007, 11:17 am
>
>> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>> It's not rock, paper, scissors:
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/35x68k
>>>
>>>
>>> "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting
>>> into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries,
>>> likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to
>>> plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue
>>> well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a
>>> priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is
>>> the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada."
>>>
>>> I knew it was too good to be true.
>>>
>>
>> I'm more concerned with environmental degradation than anything.
>> If the politics are such that they make global warming an excuse for
>> correcting global degradation, then I might be cool with that and warm
>> up to any plans in that regard.
>>
>
> I agree. Pollutants cause various sorts of damage to biological
> organisms,
> and clear, uncontravertical evidence of this damage is showing up in both
> animals and humans.
>
> It's extremely irritating (no pun intendd) when people use denials of
> global warming as some sort of license to spew pollutants willy-nilly into
> the air, water, and ground. Animal popultions are the proverbial "canary
> in the coal mine", and people's **choice** to trivialize animal indicators
> is only coming back to harm their own children - and, as they age and
> become more susceptable to pollutants, themselves as well. But then all
> they do is whine and cry about how 'the governemnt" should have done
> "something" or should do "something" - as long as they don't have to bear
> any of the burden for problems they themselves created.
>
> Global Warming is, in many ways, a diversion from the immediate
> consequences of pollution. It's become a sound-bite substitute for
> pollution issues - people who want to place their own immediate profit (or
> lazyassedness, or whatever) over even their own, and their children's,
> halth, now use the cry "Global warming is a sham" to justify the poisoning
> of any and every environment (which inevitably ends up meaning, Anyplace
> where humans can live).
>
> You'd think people would be smart enough to try to preserve thier own, and
> their children's and grandchildren's, health and wuality of life - but,
> Nope, they're too stupid to do even that.
It seems as though the thinking is constantly immediate consequences rather
than long term consequences, because "other people can worry about that
stuff, while I make my millions". It's not so much capitalism, as it is
individualism, or maybe egoism is a better word.
--
Edgar
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Interesting wind turbine | November 6, 2007, 1:04 pm |
| Foam Building Blocks | February 7, 2007, 11:18 pm |
| Lloyd Wright Ennis Brown Textile Blocks | January 28, 2007, 12:21 pm |
| Solar Decathlon in DC | October 16, 2007, 9:18 am |
| New type of Solar Cells have 90% Efficiency? | December 7, 2007, 9:21 am |
| OT O.T. Solar "tech-head" question | May 13, 2008, 5:30 pm |
| Skyscraper gets new facade: 7000 solar panels | April 22, 2007, 7:56 am |
| Solar heating panel installation photos | February 16, 2008, 9:26 am |
| Thousands of Solar Energy Inventions for you to include in your designs | January 31, 2008, 10:38 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap