Stay on topic. :-) Jindal would do better.Originally Posted by daybreaker2
Dawgbitten, I'll find something on it. It seemed like she had the heart, but just no brain...
|
|
|
|
|
Stay on topic. :-) Jindal would do better.
Dawgbitten, I'll find something on it. It seemed like she had the heart, but just no brain...
I never said it did.
no, you didn't. that remark was directed toward duckbill and dawgbitten.
I didn't know. That is why I asked.
Dawgbitten, here's an article that I thought was pretty decent about it. There are articles that go both ways on it though.
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/...606130324/1002
I'm starting to come around to it. Not because of Blanco, but because of the people who are implementing it. If this suceeds, it will suceed despite her and not because of her. I still think this needs to be a national issue though. Louisiana is too poor to be the test bed for something that could hurt the consumer.
I saw the house debate when I was in BR on the Ethenol bill. The members of the house and senate took the teeth out of the bill. I have to think that Blanco signed it just to say she signed it.
I believe that was a good thing then. I have to say that I agree with the bill in principle, but I was actually afraid of the teeth that Blanco would put in.
It won't hurt the consumer to have cleaner air and water!
Hmmm. What happened in Houston this morning? Better hope that cut off low moves away or doesnt get out into the gulf. Cut off meaning, its got nothing to stear it!
An area near Lake Charles also got hammered. This isnt even a "tropical" system.
My advise to anyone living along or south of Interstate 10 from Pensecola to Houston is this: Dont live there anymore. Its no longer safe. Im serious.
quit being an alarmist alta.
You can't be serious.
This global warming scare has got to be the most ridiculous thing since the orignal radio broadcast of The War of the Worlds.
I lived in Cameron Parish as a kid. Where did the destructive storms come from back then? There were horrendous storms. Tornados and water spouts, high gusts of winds, storms with no steering current.
Please tell me you post was in jest. Again, sarcasm is hard to read on a board. I hope that was the case.
CCCCCCCCCCCRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Nope. The Gulf of Mexico is heating up.
yes. the gulf of mexico is heating up. and there are still severe storms along the gulf just like there were 30, 50, 100 years ago. don't you understand that nobody is arguing that the gulf of mexico was the same temperature at this time of year in 1950? what we are saying is that it really is not the end of the world, and that it is most likely not manmade. this is the same point i have made over and over, but you still keep making assertions that no one is contesting as if they prove something. that is why i went "silent bob" on this thread originally. i came back because there was fresh discussion, but now it looks like its going back to the same old thing.
:thumbsdow
Bob, what you seem not to understand is that 2006 is not 1906 is terms of the influence that human activities are having on our climate.yes. the gulf of mexico is heating up. and there are still severe storms along the gulf just like there were 30, 50, 100 years ago. don't you understand that nobody is arguing that the gulf of mexico was the same temperature at this time of year in 1950? what we are saying is that it really is not the end of the world, and that it is most likely not manmade. this is the same point i have made over and over, but you still keep making assertions that no one is contesting as if they prove something. that is why i went "silent bob" on this thread originally. i came back because there was fresh discussion, but now it looks like its going back to the same old thing.
Your naked assertion that human activities are "most likely" not affecting the climate is not supported by the world's
leading scientists on this subject. Even the US Gov't admits global warming is taking place because of our burning fossil fuels.
The "carbon cycle" before we started burning fossil fuels was a "closed system". We are adding way over 6 gigatons of CO2 a year to the "carbon cycle" and this means increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Do you know what a gigaton is?
do YOU even know what a "closed system" is? do you know how many gigatons of carbon dioxide are in the atmosphere? do you know how much aditional plant growth it takes to absorb a gigaton of co2? do you know how much a gigaton of co2 contributes to global warming? i know the answer to the last two questions -- no. unless you know more than the "leading scientists" know on the subject.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
