Well, that's our solution then! Let's go get us some red mercury!
Um. . . what are we supposed to do with it? The instructions were in Romulan.
New Climate Change
- Thread starter Durry
- Start date
Um. . . what are we supposed to do with it? The instructions were in Romulan.
good on ya! Profiling advances in dealing with traditional toxic pollution is always good... as for your suggestion that environmental protections are stronger now... they will be, once again, once the Liberal party addresses the reversals/changes that Harper Conservatives made. I expect that will begin once Parliament resumes...
strawman strength is strong... no attribution recognizes CO2 as the singular causal tie.
yet... the sun can't account for the relatively recent warming. Per Richard Alley:
But, don't try and convince 'the sky is falling hand wringers' in this forum...
In typical Liberal know-it-all style.........They know better.............. don't-you-know...
Flossy............Waldo
apparently, you can't help yourself! :lol: By the by, what, as you say, "know-it-all style" is yours?
since you don't link to where you actually found that C&P gem, or offer any personal comment/interpretation, I'll readily accept it as yours.
so... you discount emissions that Canada (and other western industrialized countries) outsource to other countries?
so... you discount emissions that result within countries that Canada exports oil products to?
it's always quite telling that those who wish to perpetuate the fossil-fuel status quo have such a narrow skewed understanding of just what impact Canada's oil exports actually have... particularly as a contributing influence to continued/further reliance on fossil-fuels within those export countries and resulting emissions therein. As you look into your crystal ball gaze, it also begs the question on just when you might be willing to let it go... let "some" of it go in relation to diversification efforts away from fossil-fuels. Thinking persons realize that fossil-fuels will be with us, to ever diminishing levels, for the next 4 or so decades... what would you have Canada do then if you insist upon perpetuating the fossil-fuel status-quo to that eventual end point? Let Canadians eat cake?
Emissions from other countries are NOT our problem. That is made quite clear in the article. If we were not the supplier someone else would be. Nor do we outsource emissions. That is a fallacy the left has come up with . Note the left not only does not want us to export energy they do not want us to use it for manufacturing at home either. Their goal is to make Canada and the west in particular a third world country where only government employees make decent money and the rest of us are servants to the idle rich of the world when they come for their vacations in the "pristine" countryside.
We had the same experience here in the bay below the Mill site....Now, as T walk the around the bay in the summer I often see fingerling feeding in the weeds near the shore....
But, don't try and convince 'the sky is falling hand wringers' in this forum...
In typical Liberal know-it-all style.........They know better.............. don't-you-know...
Flossy............Waldo
How did u get flossy's nose out of waldo's a$$?
Hasn't been any warming in 18 years. What rock have you been hiding under?
enjoy your denial... only the fringe of the fringe states there's been "no warming"! :lol: Even reputable skeptics accept its warming! Enjoy your denial... I suggest you take it back to the CC Climate Change forum dominated with such scintillating C&P from denier blogs!
like I said, take solace in ignoring the emissions created by the use of Canadian resources within export countries. Ignoring them doesn't mean they don't exist. I appreciate talk of sustainable tarsands development is a tough pill to swallow for you denier types.
no - the article I linked speaks to just how the western industrialized world relies on developing countries to create most of the consumer crapola so readily gobbled up... there's no shortage of studies that speak to this. Have you got a start on your Xmas shopping yet? :lol:
please sir! I've been assured by a CC moderator that this forum is all about meaningful discussion... your continued purposeful insults are not conducive to that end. Please adjust accordingly... don't make me quote that CC rule again... don't make me!
remember... CC is supposedly all about meaningful discussion. Your infatuation with drywall is not conducive to that end. It appears you have not moved on from months back and feel this is... meaningful. I bet if you tried... really tried... you could come up with something to say that actually contributes to this thread's topic - make me proud, hey!
I find these images highly educational and of tremendous benefit, in particular, the risks associated with putting ones foot through drywall.
Not to mention that China and India are the real culprits (if you buy into the theory) and they seem to be getting a pass. Very strange.
China and India are dead ends to the Alarmists Thieves. They know that China and India will not bend in the slightest nor allow themselves to be squeezed.
So they've been given a pass as you've said. They've been given a pass and excuses and lies are made to make them actually seem like they are doing more than any nation. That way the squeeze of the west can continue unabated.
Don't know much about the subject. I'll let the scientists and anti scientists argue about it. All I'd say is that one can ask him/herself one question. Does the activities of humanity have an adverse effect on our environment. I know what my answer would be. Here's a quote from ole Al Einsteen , also from the movie "Powder" which is a good movie, " it is appallingly clear that our technology has surpassed our humanity". Some things are blatantly clear. Only have to open our eyes to see. Some things, not so clear. One thing I do know. When I was a kid I could play in the Salt River bed no worries. Now, it is a garbage dump emitting methane.. Can't play there anymo.
.
.
Don't know much about the subject. I'll let the scientists and anti scientists argue about it. All I'd say is that one can ask him/herself one question. Does the activities of humanity have an adverse effect on our environment. I know what my answer would be. Here's a quote from ole Al Einsteen , also from the movie "Powder" which is a good movie, " it is appallingly clear that our technology has surpassed our humanity". Some things are blatantly clear. Only have to open our eyes to see. Some things, not so clear. One thing I do know. When I was a kid I could play in the Salt River bed no worries. Now, it is a garbage dump emitting methane.. Can't play there anymo.
Once can be "pro-scientist" and not believe in manmade climate change. The anti-scientist crap is a divisive label which ecotards like to place on those that do not share their cast in stone view of the world.
And clearly pollution and human waste are issues which we should be focusing on. Maybe once we are done focusing on the pretend issues, we will focus on these real ones.
Divisive. Hmm. You mean, like "eco-tard.? " Have to pardon me my perspective is influenced by the Limbutt mind set.