How many millions (billions) of gallons of pesticides and tonnes of chemical fertilizers are dumped on the soil every year? I'm tired of your silly games. Go play in your diaper.
Global Warming: still the ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
Do we really know how bad chemicals are? I have a feeling this is one area where the harm is exaggerated. Chemicals for the most part are natural substances. I do know one thing from what I've been told- if we were to depend solely on organic fertilizer the soil would be totally depleted in a very few years.
It's not dumped on soil. Grow up. For every seed a precise amount of fertilizer is given at two depths N right below the seed and K a few centimeters below that. The fertilizer is formulated with a wee bit of sulpher to feed soil bacterial who convert the remaining salts into P.
The process locks away 1.2t of CO2 per acre per year after all the diesel is burned and your dinner bun cooked. And NO RUNOFF because nothing remains to wash away but that doesn't happen with zero till anyway.
List of U.S. states by life expectancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The statistics (bull sh*t) are a little confusing. Urban areas seem to be more conducive to longer life, while the deep south seems conducive to shorter life. I wonder if Minnesota being high on the list is due in part to the Mayo Clinic. Sparsely poplulated areas like Wyoming and Nevada are not conducive to long life. So maybe pollution in the U.S isn't a big factor.
Pesticides on Food: Residues on food are how most people come to the problem of pesticides
Cotton | Pesticide Action Network
Intensive crop farming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pesticides in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Plenty more where that came from.
Pesticides kill the micro-organisms that break down the soil so it can be used by plants. They deplete the soil so artificial fertiluzers are necessary to grow crops because the soil is, for all intents an purposes, dead. Petros, being an industrial farmer, needs to believe his own BS so he can sleep at night.
Cotton | Pesticide Action Network
Intensive crop farming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pesticides in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Plenty more where that came from.
Pesticides kill the micro-organisms that break down the soil so it can be used by plants. They deplete the soil so artificial fertiluzers are necessary to grow crops because the soil is, for all intents an purposes, dead. Petros, being an industrial farmer, needs to believe his own BS so he can sleep at night.
Cliff I don't grow crops. I protect the soil and it produces the crops that are twice what it did 10 years ago. Why is it producing more? Why have Canadian producers busted records with the past 6 crops?
Soil management.
You need get to the f-ck out of woods and go see the world for yourself not bleak YouTube conspiracy theory videos as a window into obscurity and mental deterioration.
We're confused! If climate change is America's biggest threat why are Canadian environmentalists called terrorists?
We're confused! If climate change is America's biggest threat why are Canadian environmentalists called terrorists?
Be environmentalists wherever you want, don't break laws, trespass, litter, burn things, destroy things, or blow things or people up and you'll be fine.
Have some guy whisper, 'You won the Lotto.' and see which way his flag blows, 15 seconds tops, . . . or are my standards unusually low?
hockey schtick @hockeyschtick1
Republicans To Investigate Climate Data Tampering By NASA
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/20/republicans-to-investigate-climate-data-tampering-by-nasa/ …
via @dailycaller
More flagrant #climate lies from the @WhiteHouse
Holdren has ignored all serious questions asked of him.
Gaithersburg, MD
https://twitter.com/SteveSGoddard/status/568891369634324480
Republicans To Investigate Climate Data Tampering By NASA
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/20/republicans-to-investigate-climate-data-tampering-by-nasa/ …
via @dailycaller
More flagrant #climate lies from the @WhiteHouse
Holdren has ignored all serious questions asked of him.
Gaithersburg, MD
https://twitter.com/SteveSGoddard/status/568891369634324480
Fuel has nothing to do with Climate Change
Fuel has nothing to do with Climate Change, Climate Change is the direct consequence of the combustion (a process) of fuel, which exacerbates Environmental Degradation.
Climate Changes all the time, particularly during changing seasons. However, the Environmental Degradation is exacerbated by the USE & ABUSE of Fuel, & it has more far-reaching consequences, than so called Climate Change.
USE of fuel can be defined as where fuel is used as source of mechanical power to satisfy a Human Need. Example: burning fossil fuel to run a school, a hospital, or to keep people in a house hold warm, …….
ABUSE of fuel can be defined as where fuel is used as source of mechanical power to satisfy needs which cannot be considered as a Human Need. Example: manufacturing of a an Aircraft Carries , & use fuel to send them to war with other manufactured war machineries like: Aircrafts, Tanks, Ammunitions etc. Or using fuel in internal combustion engines for Motor Racing – Formula 1, or using fuel for manufacturing automobile to be used in chaotic transportation system, or using fuel to run automobile with full knowledge of knowing that, the problem with the automobile is, they are the central component of a fuel wasting, environment-spoiling, chaotic transportation system, & knowing that, each gallon of gasoline (petrol) burned by a car’s engine produces about 9 kg (20 lb) of CO2.
Internal-combustion engines operate on the principle of compressing the fuel & air, burning it at a pressure above that of the atmosphere, & then expanding the products of combustion into the atmosphere. Cars, locomotives and aircraft are propelled in this way. It is therefore important for the engineer to know the properties of available FUELS and of their combustion products, & to be able to calculate the temperature which can be reached in the combustion chamber & the maximum work that can be obtained from a given quantity of fuel. To this end, the thoughts has to turn into chemical thermodynamics.
To be able to understand the Environmental Degradation understanding of basic thermodynamics, & Chemical Thermodynamics is the prerequisite:
The Chemical Thermodynamics is the subject which is vital to other branches of engineering also. For example, the operations of the metallurgical industry can be understood only through knowledge of the interactions between the fuel used in smelting the metal-bearing ores, and the various metals which make up an alloy.
The Chemical Thermodynamics is even more important for chemical engineers, who design the processes with the aid of quantitative knowledge 7 try to find out, what are the possible reactions; how pressure, temperature; changes in the material composition, & the Energy Changes for a process can effect environment.
The phrase Climate Change is a phrase devised by so called “Renewable Energy” industry with prime objective of selling manufactured Wind Turbines & Photovoltaic cells….. etc.
more
https://simonscando.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/energy-has-nothing-to-do-with-climate-change/
Fuel has nothing to do with Climate Change, Climate Change is the direct consequence of the combustion (a process) of fuel, which exacerbates Environmental Degradation.
Climate Changes all the time, particularly during changing seasons. However, the Environmental Degradation is exacerbated by the USE & ABUSE of Fuel, & it has more far-reaching consequences, than so called Climate Change.
USE of fuel can be defined as where fuel is used as source of mechanical power to satisfy a Human Need. Example: burning fossil fuel to run a school, a hospital, or to keep people in a house hold warm, …….
ABUSE of fuel can be defined as where fuel is used as source of mechanical power to satisfy needs which cannot be considered as a Human Need. Example: manufacturing of a an Aircraft Carries , & use fuel to send them to war with other manufactured war machineries like: Aircrafts, Tanks, Ammunitions etc. Or using fuel in internal combustion engines for Motor Racing – Formula 1, or using fuel for manufacturing automobile to be used in chaotic transportation system, or using fuel to run automobile with full knowledge of knowing that, the problem with the automobile is, they are the central component of a fuel wasting, environment-spoiling, chaotic transportation system, & knowing that, each gallon of gasoline (petrol) burned by a car’s engine produces about 9 kg (20 lb) of CO2.
Internal-combustion engines operate on the principle of compressing the fuel & air, burning it at a pressure above that of the atmosphere, & then expanding the products of combustion into the atmosphere. Cars, locomotives and aircraft are propelled in this way. It is therefore important for the engineer to know the properties of available FUELS and of their combustion products, & to be able to calculate the temperature which can be reached in the combustion chamber & the maximum work that can be obtained from a given quantity of fuel. To this end, the thoughts has to turn into chemical thermodynamics.
To be able to understand the Environmental Degradation understanding of basic thermodynamics, & Chemical Thermodynamics is the prerequisite:
The Chemical Thermodynamics is the subject which is vital to other branches of engineering also. For example, the operations of the metallurgical industry can be understood only through knowledge of the interactions between the fuel used in smelting the metal-bearing ores, and the various metals which make up an alloy.
The Chemical Thermodynamics is even more important for chemical engineers, who design the processes with the aid of quantitative knowledge 7 try to find out, what are the possible reactions; how pressure, temperature; changes in the material composition, & the Energy Changes for a process can effect environment.
The phrase Climate Change is a phrase devised by so called “Renewable Energy” industry with prime objective of selling manufactured Wind Turbines & Photovoltaic cells….. etc.
more
https://simonscando.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/energy-has-nothing-to-do-with-climate-change/
If building and using aircraft carriers is an abuse of fuel then what is sending 1700 private jets to a globull warming party in Switzerland?
I also noticed that they have a car engine producing aprox twice the CO2 weight as fuel burned weight.
I also noticed that they have a car engine producing aprox twice the CO2 weight as fuel burned weight.
That is when the Alarmists stick their fingers in their ears and say ... LA LA LA LA LA
perfect! Republican doofuses (doofi?) relying on the already debunked horseshyte that UK Telegraph "fake-journalist" Booker, trotted out a few backs... and Locutus, your linked article throws in quotes from your regular go-to charlatan guy, "Steven Goddard", and all is primed to have that investigation blow up on the Republicans; blow up good, blow up real good! :mrgreen:
it will be deja-vu all over again when there was such a grand lead-up to the Koch funded "Best Project" to investigate this same surface temperature record integrity... deniers were just so pumped with baited breath waiting for the chosen skepticMan, Richard Muller, to just prove NASA/NOAA/NCDC/JAMA/UEA/etc. ... were all "cooking the books, fudging the data". And then, it all blew up on deniers... blew up good, blew up real good! It was so bad for deniers, when the Best Project found the integrity of the surface temperature record datasets was sound... that there was no "fudging".. it turned Richard Muller into a realist... into a proponent of AGW. :mrgreen: Bring it on Rethuglicans!
We constantly hear and read about the claim that 97 percent of all scientific papers (or sometimes all scientists) confirm man-made global warming. The Consensus Project made such a statement in a scientific paper which precisely wants to prove the point. The paper titled: “Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature” by Cook et al. in the Environ. Res. Lett. 8 (2013) 024024 (7pp) points to the 97% consensus for anthropogenic global warming (AGW) as follows:
The supposed 97 percent AGW consensus is calculated using only a part that is 4014 of the originally surveyed 12,465 scientific papers, and not on the totality of the examined papers. The calculation approach of course is totally absurd and virtually meaningless. If one could even present such a statement on AGW in such a way to begin with, then the so called “consensus“ using the correct method of calculation would yield a result of only 32% of the surveyed scientific papers. Yet at the same time the approximately one third of the 12,465 surveyed papers are supposed to represent the entire spectrum of proponents of the AGW theory as well as the so-called luke-warmers who believe that a human contribution to climate is possible, but reject the catastrophe scenarios for the future climate.
more
German Analysis: “97 Percent Consensus” Does Not Exist … Demands To End Debate Are “Way Off Sides”
- 12,465 scientific papers examined for statements on AGW
- 4014 papers contain own statement on AGW
- Of these 4014 papers with statements on AGW, 97% confirm the AGW theory.
The supposed 97 percent AGW consensus is calculated using only a part that is 4014 of the originally surveyed 12,465 scientific papers, and not on the totality of the examined papers. The calculation approach of course is totally absurd and virtually meaningless. If one could even present such a statement on AGW in such a way to begin with, then the so called “consensus“ using the correct method of calculation would yield a result of only 32% of the surveyed scientific papers. Yet at the same time the approximately one third of the 12,465 surveyed papers are supposed to represent the entire spectrum of proponents of the AGW theory as well as the so-called luke-warmers who believe that a human contribution to climate is possible, but reject the catastrophe scenarios for the future climate.
more
German Analysis: “97 Percent Consensus” Does Not Exist … Demands To End Debate Are “Way Off Sides”
whaaa, taxi!!!! That talking point is so busted! Ya see... that was the Davos World Economic Forum... there were very few presentations that had any bearing/relationship to your arch-nemisis, GW/AGW/CC! Poor taxi - another talking point busted!