Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Global Warming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 237640" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>I don't doubt the warming part at all because at the very least in my neck of the woods the temp. (although only in small percentage) has in fact risen over the last several years. We just had the warmest August in "recorded" history. Has there been a warmer one? I'd not be surprised to learn there was but also not surprised if there wasn't. What caused this recent extreme heat? Oceanic and meterlogical changes for sure but did greenhouse gases drive that? Was it an increased temp. from the sun? Was it manmade solid impervious surfaces that are huge thermal mass collectors and create heat islands that direct and steer weather patterns including rainfall? Can anyone point solely at any one of these causes and thus eliminate the rest and then go the next step and eliminate that source and thus lead to a reverse cooling effect? The answer to that question and others like it IMO is a resounding NO! </p><p> </p><p>The simple fact is IMO that the real answer like a lot of things will in the end lay somewhere in the middle and a little more of this and a little less of that but there is no one single issue alone that has us where we are. The otherside of this coin from my POV is that in either case both sides want something from gov't to achieve an end and I trust neither in that effort. </p><p> </p><p>Deisel, you mentioned mandates for hydrib/alternative energy etc. I'm a huge, huge believer in wind and solar and even micro-hyrdo where possible. When the home is built right, solar and wind does work and works very well and it is very possible in this day and age to build a home that pulls zero energy from any grid, pull zero water from any public water source including local streams and rivers and it's possible to have zero wastewater from you property. In other words, no electric bill, no water or sewage bill period and it's more affordable and cost effective than you think! And depending or your need of traveling distances, it might be possible to move about in a motorized vehicle and never touch a drop of petro at all and even if need be to only touch a vastly smaller amount than you use to. Am I ready for the gov't to mandate any of these? OH HEIL NO! Why? Because the moment you grant gov't this power, the underbelly of graft and corruption will step up to create a bureacracy that will manipulate the economics and market system so that in the future as technologies change and the need to adapt to new conditions we will be took locked into a system to change and longterm hardship will arise as a result. You think the only place this happens is in the military/industrial complex? Guess again. </p><p>Need 2 examples?</p><p> </p><p>Years ago we face new technologies making life better and the gov't stepped in and began an earnest effort to psuh people towards 2 emerging technologies. The first was known as the REA or now know as RUS which promoted the electrification of rural America. Now bringing electric power to everyone is noble and good but it centralized electric generation to the point that to now mass convert to individual electric generation using clean solar or wind on any large scale would vastly hurt not only the economy but the gov't tax base as well. My 2nd example is gasoline. One of the chief hold ups of alternative fuels for motorized means of conveyance is there is no known mass distribution system in order to central fuel distribution not to keep us from traveling about but in order to have the mechanism to tax the motoring public in order to support the roadway infrastructure. In both cases, those industries get first order treatment from the gov't in all areas of public policy and in the cases of the up and comer, they may get a few merger table scraps just so the politicians can talk the talk and fool all of us with their "forward thinking" aproach to governance and future societal needs.</p><p> </p><p>Having centralized both these 2 elements with mandates from previous gov't acts has now put us in position that we can't respond and adapt quickly with ideas that at least would work in some regional areas. I know ethanol has become a huge thing but it's not the answer either but who pushed this? How about Archer Daniels Midland and the other mega corp. corn farms who stand to gain nicely at the bank account. Or farm commodity brokers who stand to gain at the Chicago Board of Trade at the next crop report! </p><p> </p><p>In the meantime other than cutting some money from the mideast oil sheiks and their American but lickers, it really does nothing and I use to own a car that ran on pure alcohol and loved it! BTW: the American but lickers have hedged their bets at the Chicago BOT on corn futures. They make theirs either way.</p><p> </p><p>I do think that there is some solutions at an individual level and folks like the late Dennis Weaver, Ed Begley Jr. and Darryl Hanna and others who didn't/don't preach but in fact live the very example they speak of. They are walking talking examples of real ideas and lifestyles one can easily use, even something as small as going with flourescent or even LED lighting or instead of numbers of small trips, combine them to reduce mileage. I work evenings but one night a week on my way home I go by and do the family grocery shopping. Now other than piss my wife off by hitting the ice cream isle (that's not on the list she sez but I'm telling you all it really was) the stores are about empty with people and I drive right by the store on my way home from work and instead of going back out later, I save myself time, wear/tear on the car and of course gas and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. If everyone in America could for example combine 1 trip a week like this, how must less money would go to those towelheads in the mideast and how much less CO2 into the atmosphere? Economic (so-called conservative) and Environmental (so-called liberal) are joined at the hip! Or with the fuel not used by our efforts still in the distribution system, how much pricing pressure would that generate to force the price down? Everyone wins, rich and poor. What if we cut out 2 trips or even 3 trips each? </p><p> </p><p>Why aren't the leaders and flag wavers of the 21st century patriotic movement against islamo-fascism our preaching fuel conservation to keep $$$$ out of the terrorist hands and $$$$ in our pockets? Why aren't the tree hugging "give me a knothole to hump to prove my eco purity" also out preaching ideas and real world solutions to problems instead of this constant mindless banter about "THE NEO-CONS and BUSH!" caused it all? Yeah I don't like either one myself but they didn't create this mess and that is a "HUGE FACT" that some of you just can't get over. Now, they ain't helping either but move on to ideas and solutions!</p><p> </p><p>While you guys argue and argue and argue just so at the end of the day you can thump your chest and say "I WON!" the towelheads get more of our money in their pockets, the auto makers have no reason to believe that we as a consuming public will buy fuel and eco friendly cars, the energy industry makes more and takes more of our money from us as we pay through the nose for homes that really aren't energy efficent at all (I learned that one myself and am still learning and correcting) and what impact manmade conditions does have will continue to go on. It might be that on the day one of you can stand alone and declare victory that either the towelheads will have our money and own us lock, stock and barrel or the environment will be so trashed you can't live in it anyway. Might even be both!</p><p> </p><p>From what I can see, you both have an equal vested interest in kicking the root cause because even though your views of the after effects are different, in the end you'll still both loose either way. But Osama sends his love to you both anyway. And I never even discussed the idiot Chavez to our south and how much he's making on this deal!</p><p> </p><p>JMO</p><p> </p><p>Oh, I almost forgot.</p><p> </p><p>Ding! </p><p>Ding!</p><p>Ding!</p><p> </p><p>Battle on!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 237640, member: 2189"] I don't doubt the warming part at all because at the very least in my neck of the woods the temp. (although only in small percentage) has in fact risen over the last several years. We just had the warmest August in "recorded" history. Has there been a warmer one? I'd not be surprised to learn there was but also not surprised if there wasn't. What caused this recent extreme heat? Oceanic and meterlogical changes for sure but did greenhouse gases drive that? Was it an increased temp. from the sun? Was it manmade solid impervious surfaces that are huge thermal mass collectors and create heat islands that direct and steer weather patterns including rainfall? Can anyone point solely at any one of these causes and thus eliminate the rest and then go the next step and eliminate that source and thus lead to a reverse cooling effect? The answer to that question and others like it IMO is a resounding NO! The simple fact is IMO that the real answer like a lot of things will in the end lay somewhere in the middle and a little more of this and a little less of that but there is no one single issue alone that has us where we are. The otherside of this coin from my POV is that in either case both sides want something from gov't to achieve an end and I trust neither in that effort. Deisel, you mentioned mandates for hydrib/alternative energy etc. I'm a huge, huge believer in wind and solar and even micro-hyrdo where possible. When the home is built right, solar and wind does work and works very well and it is very possible in this day and age to build a home that pulls zero energy from any grid, pull zero water from any public water source including local streams and rivers and it's possible to have zero wastewater from you property. In other words, no electric bill, no water or sewage bill period and it's more affordable and cost effective than you think! And depending or your need of traveling distances, it might be possible to move about in a motorized vehicle and never touch a drop of petro at all and even if need be to only touch a vastly smaller amount than you use to. Am I ready for the gov't to mandate any of these? OH HEIL NO! Why? Because the moment you grant gov't this power, the underbelly of graft and corruption will step up to create a bureacracy that will manipulate the economics and market system so that in the future as technologies change and the need to adapt to new conditions we will be took locked into a system to change and longterm hardship will arise as a result. You think the only place this happens is in the military/industrial complex? Guess again. Need 2 examples? Years ago we face new technologies making life better and the gov't stepped in and began an earnest effort to psuh people towards 2 emerging technologies. The first was known as the REA or now know as RUS which promoted the electrification of rural America. Now bringing electric power to everyone is noble and good but it centralized electric generation to the point that to now mass convert to individual electric generation using clean solar or wind on any large scale would vastly hurt not only the economy but the gov't tax base as well. My 2nd example is gasoline. One of the chief hold ups of alternative fuels for motorized means of conveyance is there is no known mass distribution system in order to central fuel distribution not to keep us from traveling about but in order to have the mechanism to tax the motoring public in order to support the roadway infrastructure. In both cases, those industries get first order treatment from the gov't in all areas of public policy and in the cases of the up and comer, they may get a few merger table scraps just so the politicians can talk the talk and fool all of us with their "forward thinking" aproach to governance and future societal needs. Having centralized both these 2 elements with mandates from previous gov't acts has now put us in position that we can't respond and adapt quickly with ideas that at least would work in some regional areas. I know ethanol has become a huge thing but it's not the answer either but who pushed this? How about Archer Daniels Midland and the other mega corp. corn farms who stand to gain nicely at the bank account. Or farm commodity brokers who stand to gain at the Chicago Board of Trade at the next crop report! In the meantime other than cutting some money from the mideast oil sheiks and their American but lickers, it really does nothing and I use to own a car that ran on pure alcohol and loved it! BTW: the American but lickers have hedged their bets at the Chicago BOT on corn futures. They make theirs either way. I do think that there is some solutions at an individual level and folks like the late Dennis Weaver, Ed Begley Jr. and Darryl Hanna and others who didn't/don't preach but in fact live the very example they speak of. They are walking talking examples of real ideas and lifestyles one can easily use, even something as small as going with flourescent or even LED lighting or instead of numbers of small trips, combine them to reduce mileage. I work evenings but one night a week on my way home I go by and do the family grocery shopping. Now other than piss my wife off by hitting the ice cream isle (that's not on the list she sez but I'm telling you all it really was) the stores are about empty with people and I drive right by the store on my way home from work and instead of going back out later, I save myself time, wear/tear on the car and of course gas and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. If everyone in America could for example combine 1 trip a week like this, how must less money would go to those towelheads in the mideast and how much less CO2 into the atmosphere? Economic (so-called conservative) and Environmental (so-called liberal) are joined at the hip! Or with the fuel not used by our efforts still in the distribution system, how much pricing pressure would that generate to force the price down? Everyone wins, rich and poor. What if we cut out 2 trips or even 3 trips each? Why aren't the leaders and flag wavers of the 21st century patriotic movement against islamo-fascism our preaching fuel conservation to keep $$$$ out of the terrorist hands and $$$$ in our pockets? Why aren't the tree hugging "give me a knothole to hump to prove my eco purity" also out preaching ideas and real world solutions to problems instead of this constant mindless banter about "THE NEO-CONS and BUSH!" caused it all? Yeah I don't like either one myself but they didn't create this mess and that is a "HUGE FACT" that some of you just can't get over. Now, they ain't helping either but move on to ideas and solutions! While you guys argue and argue and argue just so at the end of the day you can thump your chest and say "I WON!" the towelheads get more of our money in their pockets, the auto makers have no reason to believe that we as a consuming public will buy fuel and eco friendly cars, the energy industry makes more and takes more of our money from us as we pay through the nose for homes that really aren't energy efficent at all (I learned that one myself and am still learning and correcting) and what impact manmade conditions does have will continue to go on. It might be that on the day one of you can stand alone and declare victory that either the towelheads will have our money and own us lock, stock and barrel or the environment will be so trashed you can't live in it anyway. Might even be both! From what I can see, you both have an equal vested interest in kicking the root cause because even though your views of the after effects are different, in the end you'll still both loose either way. But Osama sends his love to you both anyway. And I never even discussed the idiot Chavez to our south and how much he's making on this deal! JMO Oh, I almost forgot. Ding! Ding! Ding! Battle on! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Global Warming
Top