UN Environmental Summit in Johannesburg S Africa

[Xi]

@cystic:

Also i’m not sure the whole “open borders” thing would work. . . the Mexicans are a little too “Americanized” :lol:

By “Americanized,” do you mean ‘welfare, social services and free medical sevices seeking?’ - Xi

“The Cold War isn’t thawing; it is burning with a deadly
heat. Communism isn’t sleeping; it is, as always, plotting,
scheming, working, fighting.” - Richard M. Nixon

[cystic crypt]

@Xi:

@cystic:

Also i’m not sure the whole “open borders” thing would work. . . the Mexicans are a little too “Americanized” :lol:

By “Americanized,” do you mean ‘welfare, social services and free medical sevices seeking?’ - Xi

touche

[Xi]

Xi takes a bow (and falls flat on his bearded face.) :D - Xi

“Those who wait for that must wait
until a shrimp learns to whistle.”
Referring to the possibility of the
Soviet Union rejecting communism.

• Nikita Khrushchev, Soviet premier. speech,
  9/17/1955, Moscow. New York Times (9/18/1955).

[Xi]

@F_k:

@X:

The US had eliminated 98% of it’s 1974 automobile emisssions by 1992.

Standing alone, this is close to lying.
It sounds like: In 1992 all the cars in the US put only 2% of the stuff into the air that they put there in 1974. That cannot be.
Please, back up your claim!

What I was saying was that individual cars have been cleaned up! Our biggest vehicular polluters are trucks, school buses and metropolitan buses. We can blame the unions, politicians, transportation industry and miserly taxpayer here for that. Hmm! I think that’s just about everybody here. :o
@X:

In 1970 environmentalists said we would run out of oil in 100 years(2070).
In 1995 environmentalists said we would run out of oil in 200 years(2195).
Sounds like we’ve found more oil and become more efficient in its’ use.

@F_k:

Where do you get this quotes from? Esp. where did you get the 1195 quote from.

This is from the US news media of 1970 and 1995. I was there. But, of course, you won’t accept it … because … I said it.
@F_k:

… the Have Nots complain, as they have not because of the haves who took it. (oversimplified, my last hope you can understand that now!)

Complaining as it will always be! But not everything was taken … much of it was traded/paid for it. - Xi

[Xi]

@Anonymous:

Do you know how much species die each years ? Do you think it is normal ?

You don’t seem to care that much. I see … :o … NO PROOF!

[Xi]

CO2 …
Humans have been gaining ground on trees and grass for …
let’s be conservative … 5,000 years. If something wasn’t helping the balance over 5,000 years ago it sure seems to be now. And with over 150 years of Industrial Revolution, the Earth seems to be doing very well. :)

The hole in the ozone layer …
Yesterday, 9/30/2002, the news media (CBS/US) stated that the ozone hole had divided in two. They also said the hole, which had previously been measured at 9 million (that’s thousand thousand) sq. miles, was now (as two holes) measured at 6 million (that’s thousand thousand) sq. miles. Sounds like a major shift in the environment. Next we’ll have to protect the ozone layer. Wouldn’t that be a gas? Hmm! :D

Methinks the envirowackos (but I am an environmentalist) are losing ground. Oh, No! They will become more extreme! I am looking forward to the laughs, but am sorry for the pain and unemployment they will cause. - Xi

I have seen far more environmentalists, liberals and Democrats litter, pollute, and deface public and private property, deny others rights of free speech and physically harm others who disagreed with them or were innocent bystanders. - Xi

[TG Moses VI]

Ozone layer? We don’t need it - LA’s pollution layer provides more protection than we’ll ever need. :o

[Xi]

But La needs a good load from China. - Xi

[TG Moses VI]

Psssttt… that’s why we have Mexico. :)

[Guest]

@Xi:

CO2 …
Humans have been gaining ground on trees and grass for …
let’s be conservative … 5,000 years. If something wasn’t helping the balance over 5,000 years ago it sure seems to be now. And with over 150 years of Industrial Revolution, the Earth seems to be doing very well. :)

Gaining ground on trees…… well, trees have a lifetime of say 50-150 years. All carbon they store was in the air in that time. The change done by cutting down trees over the last millenia is slow compared to that cycle.
Ergo, the earth has had some time to adapt to that, and it seems it did. Sure, it changed the ecosystem, but slowly enough for noone to suffer.

No comes the industrialization. Digging up coal and oil on a large scale: Alle the carbon that ancient, vast forests had stored. We release this huge amount of carbon in …say two trees lifetimes…
And that is way too fast for any eco-system to adapt.

The hole in the ozone layer …
Yesterday, 9/30/2002, the news media (CBS/US) stated that the ozone hole had divided in two. They also said the hole, which had previously been measured at 9 million (that’s thousand thousand) sq. miles, was now (as two holes) measured at 6 million (that’s thousand thousand) sq. miles.

Nice that you give only half the info. I read the same / a similar article.
The hole is much smaller this year, than the last years, true. But the explanation is that it is due to temperature changes (if i remember correctly).

As well: it is extremely funny to see these lines of argument by anti-environmentalists:
(1) CO2, temperature rise: … well, what we see is inside the fluctuations, we need more time to see wether it is real or jsut a “one-year-effect”. So, we keep on going as usual until then
(2) Ozone layer: it shrinks, it shrinks, it shrinks… Well, it does so this year, but of course, that is not a “one-year-effect” but real. We can go on as we did before …

See my point, and why i am highly suspicious?

Methinks the envirowackos (but I am an environmentalist) are losing ground. Oh, No! They will become more extreme! I am looking forward to the laughs, but am sorry for the pain and unemployment they will cause. - Xi

Hmmm, I am looking forward to the new technologies we will need, and the new jobs it will create in the long run.
If you feel sorry for the unemployment…… then let’s destroy all computers… that will create lots of new jobs for “math-slaves”… and after that all telephones and telegraphs and TVs and radios. That will create a lot of jobs for couriers, book- and newspaper-printers, messagers etc.
And then we destroy all cars, planes and even trains… new jobs as we need much more people doing the transports on horseback and sailing ships, and people to “grow” all the horses we will need…
I guess i made my point :)

[cystic crypt]

@F_alk:

As well: it is extremely funny to see these lines of argument by anti-environmentalists:
(1) CO2, temperature rise: … well, what we see is inside the fluctuations, we need more time to see wether it is real or jsut a “one-year-effect”. So, we keep on going as usual until then
(2) Ozone layer: it shrinks, it shrinks, it shrinks… Well, it does so this year, but of course, that is not a “one-year-effect” but real. We can go on as we did before …

See my point, and why i am highly suspicious?

i’m usually suspicious of people who quickly jump to the extremes of an argument - their data tends to be quite skewed and only half of it is generally presented. Also people who do not hold to their beliefs are usually labelled as well with extreme labels.
Is anyone truly an anti-environmentalist? Or is this a label that is applied to someone who believes that the environment is not truly being threatened - i thought an anti-environmentalist would say something like “we have a problem - the ozone layer is not being destroyed as quickly as we would like. We must start burning things more quickly.”
As opposed to a non-fear-monger (another extreme label - mocking those suspicious of moderates) who might say "well, it turns out that the damage to the environment isn’t as bad as people say . . . ".
The fact is that there are few facts of proven relevance still. Any time it gets warm or cold here, we’re always “approaching records set in 1883” or something like that. Certainly i’m pro-environment, pro-Kyoto (unlike my dad - who is not anti-environment), but we jump to hysterics far too often in these matters.

[Guest]

@cystic:

@F_alk:

…anti-environmentalists…

… Also people who do not hold to their beliefs are usually labelled as well with extreme labels.
Is anyone truly an anti-environmentalist? …
…i thought an anti-environmentalist would say something like “we have a problem - the ozone layer is not being destroyed as quickly as we would like. We must start burning things more quickly.”…

You are right of course, i overreacted to the term envirowackos ….
but i like your definitoin of anti-environmentalist…but could as well be a person who hates environmentalists, with the hyphen in the word :)

[cystic crypt]

ahhhh of course.
You were talking about people who are against environmentalists.
silly me.
many apologies.
(damn hippies . . . ) :P

[Xi]

@F_k:

Nice that you give only half the info. I read the same / a similar article. The hole is much smaller this year, than the last years, true. But the explanation is that it is due to temperature changes (if i remember correctly).

Ah, yes, temperature! That argument has already been lost in a previous string.
Scientists have admitted that the earth is heating itself more than man is, and they presented studies to back it up! The Earth is still doing a great job of Healing herself!
When there’s an obvious need for change someone (or the evil Automobile and Oil Industries who have perpetrated the ‘Buy Up All the Alternatives’ ploy will step forward with the solution. The Profit Factor will out!
You’ve heard those ‘Automobile and Oil Industries’ rumors,
haven’t you, F_k?

@F_k:

As well: it is extremely funny to see these lines of argument by anti-environmentalists

Thank you for showing your presumptive nature, again!
I am a skeptical environmentalist,
not an envirowacko like some. - Xi

[Guest]

@Xi:

@F_k:

Nice that you give only half the info. I read the same / a similar article. The hole is much smaller this year, than the last years, true. But the explanation is that it is due to temperature changes (if i remember correctly).

Ah, yes, temperature! That argument has already been lost in a previous string.

We surely have totally different sources there, and i don’t trust yours as far as i can reach with my arms tied behind my back.
The ozone layer and the CO2 to first order have nothing to do with each other. I will not discuss that further, as we won’t “listen to each other”… sorry, lacking a better expression.

When there’s an obvious need for change someone (or the evil Automobile and Oil Industries who have perpetrated the ‘Buy Up All the Alternatives’ ploy will step forward with the solution. The Profit Factor will out!

i hope it will not be too late then.

@F_k:

As well: it is extremely funny to see these lines of argument by anti-environmentalists

Thank you for showing your presumptive nature, again!
I am a skeptical environmentalist,
not an envirowacko like some. - Xi

I was not refering to you there, feel free to feel offended, but it wasn’t you i meant.

[Guest]

Some news on the hole in the ozone layer.
It was smaller the last years, but that definitely was due to other temperatures.

See:
http://www.antdiv.gov.au/default.asp?casid=17

[Janus1]

“It is absolutely ridiculous that we live without an ozone layer. We have men, we have rockets, we have seran wrap. FIX IT!!! And dont come back till you do”
-Lewis Black

[Grigoriy Ivanovitch]

Scientists are predicting a large ozone hole over much of Antarctica this spring.

Parliamentary Secretary for the Antarctic Dr Sharman Stone said that a larger ozone hole meant that people were likely to be at greater risk of sunburn and should take precautions.

Question…if the hole is only above Australia, how many people are going to get sunburned there?

“Our scientists are telling us that the trend in atmospheric readings above Antarctica are similar to those observed in 2000, when the ozone hole was of record size and about three times the size of Australia,” Dr Stone said.

“This is the legacy of ozone depletion over many years and reinforces just how long it can take to repair the damage.

If it only took 3 years to shrink the hole that much, it’s not that long of a time, is it?

[El Jefe]

I hate to say it(NoIdon’t!), but Xi was right 10 months ago(even without good sources at the time.)

‘Temperature’ is temperature whether is air, water, or soil measurement.

Though this year is loopy in the US and Europe(from what I’ve read and heard I hope no one requires SOURCES for that.) Any other continents having a bad summer/winter(South of the equator. :D )

Has the Antarctic melted yet? Whatever happened to that iceberg the size of Australia? :P

[Grigoriy Ivanovitch]

Though this year is loopy in the US and Europe(from what I’ve read and heard I hope no one requires SOURCES for that.)

No sources necessary, already been confirmed in other thread, therefore it’s true. :lol: I was going to try and include some sources in my other post, but I was too lazy to find any that F_alk would say were wrong. :roll: So I just gave up and went with my questions from the web site he found. (Should be a better debate)