Climate change or Pollution?

[Rustic]

Wind energy has a debilitating deminishing return...
Solar has shown promise but the mined resources to make it reliable are truly toxic...

Everything else is pie in the sky

Bullshit!

Why hasnt it taken hold then??

 

[daws101]

Wind energy has a debilitating deminishing return...
Solar has shown promise but the mined resources to make it reliable are truly toxic...

Everything else is pie in the sky

Bullshit!

Why hasnt it taken hold then??

Really? You have to ask that?
Where I live many thousands of people have switched to solar and all new construction is required to have it.
Stfu.

 

[Rustic]

Wind energy has a debilitating deminishing return...
Solar has shown promise but the mined resources to make it reliable are truly toxic...

Everything else is pie in the sky

Bullshit!

Why hasnt it taken hold then??

Really? You have to ask that?
Where I live many thousands of people have switched to solar and all new construction is required to have it.
Stfu.

Fine, it should be a choice no one should be forced into that horseshit... Lol

 

[Rustic]

If Someone wants to have 100 W incandescent bulbs for light and drive a 2-3 mile per gallon car and heat their home with coal, or Use two or 3 W LED lights and drive hundred mile per gallon car and heat their home with a wind turbine... Who gives a shit?
Oh Wait..... A POS control freak. Lol

Choice is the only right way...

 

[Rustic]

If I ever caught myself driving Prius or a tesla, I'd punch myself in the face 50 times…

 

[daws101]

Wind energy has a debilitating deminishing return...
Solar has shown promise but the mined resources to make it reliable are truly toxic...

Everything else is pie in the sky

Bullshit!

Why hasnt it taken hold then??

Really? You have to ask that?
Where I live many thousands of people have switched to solar and all new construction is required to have it.
Stfu.

Fine, it should be a choice no one should be forced into that horseshit... Lol

Nobody is .

 

[daws101]

If Someone wants to have 100 W incandescent bulbs for light and drive a 2-3 mile per gallon car and heat their home with coal, or Use two or 3 W LED lights and drive hundred mile per gallon car and heat their home with a wind turbine... Who gives a shit?
Oh Wait..... A POS control freak. Lol

Choice is the only right way...

Not if those choices do damage to the heath and the welfare of everyone.
Cons Will inevitably choose the most selfish option.

 

[Rustic]

If Someone wants to have 100 W incandescent bulbs for light and drive a 2-3 mile per gallon car and heat their home with coal, or Use two or 3 W LED lights and drive hundred mile per gallon car and heat their home with a wind turbine... Who gives a shit?
Oh Wait..... A POS control freak. Lol

Choice is the only right way...

Not if those choices do damage to the heath and the welfare of everyone.
Cons Will inevitably choose the most selfish option.

If Someone wants to have 100 W incandescent bulbs for light and drive a 2-3 mile per gallon car and heat their home with coal, or Use two or 3 W LED lights and drive hundred mile per gallon car and heat their home with a wind turbine... Who gives a shit?
Oh Wait..... A POS control freak. Lol

Choice is the only right way...

Not if those choices do damage to the heath and the welfare of everyone.
Cons Will inevitably choose the most selfish option.

''Damage to the health and the welfare of everyone" - hearsay

 

[hellraiser]

Which is it? the libs say the actions of human beings are changing the climate of planet earth. Intelligent people say that man is polluting planet earth, Ok so far?

so, libs are saying that pollution directly causes climate change, but they do not want to attack pollution as their cause celeb.

Libs say that CO2 is a pollutant, but the % of CO2 in the atmosphere has been consistent at .039% since we were capable of measuring it and was the same millions of years ago based on ice cores etc.

So the question of the day is:

Why don't libs make pollution their cause and forget the climate change bullshit?

no one likes pollution, everyone would hop on the anti-pollution bandwagon.

So what is really going on here?

My take: climate change is a hoax but libs are using it to control the activities of humans who are doing things that liberals don't like. Like riding in private planes----------oh wait, liberals do that. or living in huge mansions that suck up tons of electricity---------------oh wait, liberals do that.

So, it seems that liberals want to control our lives but not theirs. Got it.

The correct term is human caused global warming. And it is a reality. Each year, all the volcanoes on earth release an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere. Each year, humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons of CO2. I have a couple graphs that may help you a little.

 

[francoHFW]

Of course the point is to go after pollution, especially from fossil fuels.

Get real, its densely populated liberal inner cities spewing the pollution. Pouring raw sewage into waterways. Exporting mountains of garbage and waste. Fouling the air. Paving over nature and overloading the ecosystem. Liberal run inner cities are pollution factories.

Yes, pollution = bad

Pollution does not cause climate change-----------that's the point.

Fossil fuel pollution certainly does.

ACTUALLY, the old rust belt Dem cities have lost so much manufacturing they have very clean air.

They have clean air but yet they still drive cars?....how can that be?

Dem regulation.

 

[Dale Smith]

Which is it? the libs say the actions of human beings are changing the climate of planet earth. Intelligent people say that man is polluting planet earth, Ok so far?

so, libs are saying that pollution directly causes climate change, but they do not want to attack pollution as their cause celeb.

Libs say that CO2 is a pollutant, but the % of CO2 in the atmosphere has been consistent at .039% since we were capable of measuring it and was the same millions of years ago based on ice cores etc.

So the question of the day is:

Why don't libs make pollution their cause and forget the climate change bullshit?

no one likes pollution, everyone would hop on the anti-pollution bandwagon.

So what is really going on here?

My take: climate change is a hoax but libs are using it to control the activities of humans who are doing things that liberals don't like. Like riding in private planes----------oh wait, liberals do that. or living in huge mansions that suck up tons of electricity---------------oh wait, liberals do that.

So, it seems that liberals want to control our lives but not theirs. Got it.

The correct term is human caused global warming. And it is a reality. Each year, all the volcanoes on earth release an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere. Each year, humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons of CO2. I have a couple graphs that may help you a little.View attachment 71629 View attachment 71630

I have a couple of questions for you.......

#1 Wha

Which is it? the libs say the actions of human beings are changing the climate of planet earth. Intelligent people say that man is polluting planet earth, Ok so far?

so, libs are saying that pollution directly causes climate change, but they do not want to attack pollution as their cause celeb.

Libs say that CO2 is a pollutant, but the % of CO2 in the atmosphere has been consistent at .039% since we were capable of measuring it and was the same millions of years ago based on ice cores etc.

So the question of the day is:

Why don't libs make pollution their cause and forget the climate change bullshit?

no one likes pollution, everyone would hop on the anti-pollution bandwagon.

So what is really going on here?

My take: climate change is a hoax but libs are using it to control the activities of humans who are doing things that liberals don't like. Like riding in private planes----------oh wait, liberals do that. or living in huge mansions that suck up tons of electricity---------------oh wait, liberals do that.

So, it seems that liberals want to control our lives but not theirs. Got it.

The correct term is human caused global warming. And it is a reality. Each year, all the volcanoes on earth release an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere. Each year, humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons of CO2. I have a couple graphs that may help you a little.View attachment 71629 View attachment 71630

So I have some questions...what type of equipment do they use to allegedly measure the amount of CO2 (which is one of the building blocks of life) into the atmosphere and if there was too much of it, shouldn't the landscape be greener? Because what I am seeing is a massive die off of trees all over the country. When these U.N sanction scientists create a computer model, the computer can only give a summary based on the information that it is given...so if it is garbage in, you are gonna get garbage out and the IPCC has already been busted for posting erroneous data that was fudged in order to substantiate the agenda of "Climate Change/ Global Warming".


Secondly, there has been a geo-engineering program that has been going on in earnest since 1997 with the aerosol spraying of the upper atmosphere using nano-particulates of aluminum, strontium and barium in all NATO countries....soil and water samples bear this out and it's not disputable or even up for debate because it IS happening. What seems to be happening is that heat is actually being trapped by these metals instead of reflecting them away from the earth thus giving the impression that the climate is warming when in all actuality, the heat is being trapped even while less of the sun's rays are reaching the earth. Global dimming is occurring and I believe that the cause is the constant spraying of the upper atmosphere with nano-particulates.....thoughts???

 

[Dale Smith]

Of course the point is to go after pollution, especially from fossil fuels.

Get real, its densely populated liberal inner cities spewing the pollution. Pouring raw sewage into waterways. Exporting mountains of garbage and waste. Fouling the air. Paving over nature and overloading the ecosystem. Liberal run inner cities are pollution factories.

Yes, pollution = bad

Pollution does not cause climate change-----------that's the point.

Fossil fuel pollution certainly does.

ACTUALLY, the old rust belt Dem cities have lost so much manufacturing they have very clean air.

They have clean air but yet they still drive cars?....how can that be?

Dem regulation.

Of what????????

 

[Muhammed]

Carbon dioxide is the green gas.

 

[francoHFW]

Get real, its densely populated liberal inner cities spewing the pollution. Pouring raw sewage into waterways. Exporting mountains of garbage and waste. Fouling the air. Paving over nature and overloading the ecosystem. Liberal run inner cities are pollution factories.

Yes, pollution = bad

Pollution does not cause climate change-----------that's the point.

Fossil fuel pollution certainly does.

ACTUALLY, the old rust belt Dem cities have lost so much manufacturing they have very clean air.

They have clean air but yet they still drive cars?....how can that be?

Dem regulation.

Of what????????

CAFE regulations.

 

[francoHFW]

Carbon dioxide is the green gas.

Oh ferchrisake google CO2 pollution.

 

[Muhammed]

Carbon dioxide is the green gas.

Oh ferchrisake google CO2 pollution.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is plant food.

I've shown you proof of that fact.

 

[Redfish]

Ready to further pollute the human values of beauty and purity.

No one is in favor of polluted water and air. why not find non-polluting ways to use fossil fuels until alternates are economically viable?

Its foolish to demand that we all change before there is anything to change to.

BTW, do you flush your waste products into a sewage system? or do you recycle them?

That is not true. Industries will pollute as much as they can get away with if there's money in it.

why do you assume that all humans who are in business are inherently evil and will do anything for money?

 

[Redfish]

Wind energy has a debilitating deminishing return...
Solar has shown promise but the mined resources to make it reliable are truly toxic...

Everything else is pie in the sky

Bullshit!

Why hasnt it taken hold then??

Really? You have to ask that?
Where I live many thousands of people have switched to solar and all new construction is required to have it.
Stfu.

do you understand how much fossil fuel is consumed to make solar panels? Do you understand that solar panels have a life of 12 years or so? Do you understand that liberals in California blocked a solar panel farm to save a few lizards?

 

[daws101]

Wind energy has a debilitating deminishing return...
Solar has shown promise but the mined resources to make it reliable are truly toxic...

Everything else is pie in the sky

Bullshit!

Why hasnt it taken hold then??

Really? You have to ask that?
Where I live many thousands of people have switched to solar and all new construction is required to have it.
Stfu.

do you understand how much fossil fuel is consumed to make solar panels? Do you understand that solar panels have a life of 12 years or so? Do you understand that liberals in California blocked a solar panel farm to save a few lizards?

Do you understand your opinion is fucking irrelevant.

 

[daws101]

If Someone wants to have 100 W incandescent bulbs for light and drive a 2-3 mile per gallon car and heat their home with coal, or Use two or 3 W LED lights and drive hundred mile per gallon car and heat their home with a wind turbine... Who gives a shit?
Oh Wait..... A POS control freak. Lol

Choice is the only right way...

Not if those choices do damage to the heath and the welfare of everyone.
Cons Will inevitably choose the most selfish option.

If Someone wants to have 100 W incandescent bulbs for light and drive a 2-3 mile per gallon car and heat their home with coal, or Use two or 3 W LED lights and drive hundred mile per gallon car and heat their home with a wind turbine... Who gives a shit?
Oh Wait..... A POS control freak. Lol

Choice is the only right way...

Not if those choices do damage to the heath and the welfare of everyone.
Cons Will inevitably choose the most selfish option.

''Damage to the health and the welfare of everyone" - hearsay

Fact.