Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
Canuck Offline OP
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
Honestly, this guy is completely nuts.
Quote:

James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

He's going after politicians as well
Quote:
He is also considering personally targeting members of Congress who have a poor track record on climate change in the coming November elections. He will campaign to have several of them unseated

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/23/fossilfuels.climatechange

The thought police are out in force it seems. And some people will still maintain that this guy has no agenda and is unbiased?? Bull$hit! It disgusts me that this guy is even associated with the word "scientist".

Let's make this clear, this is an employee of the US government calling for the prosecution of private individuals based on the content of their speech. Stop and think on that for a second. Repeat it a couple times.
I'm guessing he wouldn't favour the opposite....eg a "warmist" being brought up on charges for the deliberate promotion of misleading information regarding CO2's impact on avg T. On a related note, has anybody compared the GISS temp dataset to NOAA, Hadley, or any of the satellite datasets? smile

This arrogant prick then goes on to attack democracy, saying
Quote:
democracy is not working the way it's intended to work.
And why is that Jimmy-boy? Because the world isn't filled with lemmings willing to hang on your every word? I think I found the cause of "global warming".....it's all the hot air spewing out of Hansen's mouth.

I found this neat little graph of what average global temperature has done since Mr. Hansen's first pontification speech to Congress. Looks downright scary doesn't it?

.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.


Well if the shoe fits! LOL

that would be like putting the tobacco farmers on trial.

the better thing would be to put the auto manufacturers on trial.

as they control the gas mileage of automobiles.

in the early 80's a volkswagon jetta got 57 mpg...

list of older HOT products

but I see where his reasoning is , he is upset because the oil companies are spreading missinformation about the effects of burning fossil fuels on the climate , well its not their fault if people who have been informed , continue to buy automobiles that are damaging to the climate.

even though they really dont have much of a choice to choose from.

it is the automobile manufacturers responcibility to provide a safe means of transportation to the public , if the automobiile manufacturers also have knowlege of the negative effects of fosile fuel burning automobiles on the climate and continue to
promote and sell fosile fueled automobiles then they are the ones that are most liable for those damages.

wouldnt you think?

.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 94
I
Member
Offline
Member
I
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 94
Canuck - all your anger is absolutely justfied .... but I would not worry too much about this nonsense. This kind of rhetoric comes not because he is winning, but because he is desperate. The truth is that the general public are just not buying it - no matter what the current political fashion is now. Hansen knows this and he knows that is only a matter of time before the politics catches up. He knows that 2009 is a key year with a new US president and a Kyoto follow-up targeted. He also knows that the man in the street isn't there yet. With 6 out of 10 polled stating that they dont belieive the scientists ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/22/climatechange.carbonemissions

He knows this. And he knows its going the wrong way - he knows that everyone can read temperature graphs like the one you showed. Rejoice in Hansens rhetoric - its the start of the death roll.

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/22/climatechange.carbonemissions

From your own link, ImranCan, "Two thirds" of your 'man in the street'
"want the government to do more...."
'People are broadly concerned, but not entirely convinced,' said Downing.
"There is growing concern that an economic depression and rising fuel and food prices
are denting public interest in environmental issues. Some environmentalists blame
the public's doubts on last year's Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle,
and on recent books, including one by Lord Lawson, the former Chancellor, that question
the consensus on climate change."
"Despite this, three quarters still professed to be concerned about climate change."

"Ipsos MORI polled 1,039 adults and found that six out of 10 agreed that
'many scientific experts still question if humans are contributing to climate change',
and that four out of 10 'sometimes think climate change might not be as bad as people say'."

IMHO, It sounds as if some of the 'man in the street' folks are wondering if these claims
might have some basis or merit. It's a pity more folks don't have the time to investigate
more deeply into the science; beyond the quick sound-bites and oversimplifications of
denialist who claim anthropogenic effects are a hoax.
"Professor Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, said politicians and
campaigners were to blame for over-simplifying the problem...."

Well, such a complex problem does lend itself to being oversimplified by many folks, it seems.

The rest of Bjorn's quote: "...by only publicising evidence to support the [AGW] case.
'Things that we do know - like humans do cause climate change - are being put in doubt,' said Lomborg.
'If you're saying, "We're not going to tell you the whole truth, but we're going to ask you to pay up a lot of money," people are going to be unsure.'
===

Originally Posted By: Canuk
I found this neat little graph...

Little graph! I've been avoiding this thread just because it's so hard to read, scrolling across to see the end of....
Next time, try to make it a little graph; or just give us a link.
===

So Canuk,
Did Hansen actually say anything about "non-believers," as you imply.
I looked for the quote, but couldn't find it.
Did you just make that up?
I guess blogging like this, nobody is libel for slanderous behaviour;
lucky for you, eh?

wink


Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
Isn't it funny that when the CO2 religion fails, the alarmists always turn to "anthropogenic effects" and use real pollution to support CO2 claims? Like the two are tied together. HA!

They even make up names for the "non-believers"..."Denialists".

"OH! Those evil non-believing Denialists".

Too funny. :-)

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Originally Posted By: Max
...the alarmists always turn to "anthropogenic effects" and use real pollution to support CO2 claims? Like the two are tied together. HA!
Huh?

Max, you say
Quote:
They [alarmists] even make up names for the "non-believers"..."Denialists".

Well, when you've been labeled an alarmist, you tend to look for a comparable retort.
Personally, I prefer the company of alarmist such as Paul Revere, Winston Churchill, or the Supreme Court
( http://www.edf.org/article.cfm?contentID=5623
Supreme Court finds that EPA can regulate heat-trapping pollution,
putting pressure on Congress to act on global warming
),
rather than denialists such as Marie Antoinette, Neville Chamberlain, or James Inhofe.
===

It looks more like the denialists are making up things;
like the title of this thread, attributing that quote to Hansen: 'Non-believers should be jailed'
Isn't that called slander?
confused



Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Ontario Canada is melting , I hope your house isnt built on top of the melting parts.









if we call the above
(the effects of Global Warming)
...due to the effects of C02
or
Global Warming due to
(the effects of the purple hippo)

what difference does it make , the above effects
show that something is causing this , something warmer than normal.

Cannuck ... what do you think it is?

you live there in Ontario right , what does it seem to be?

monitor permafrost in google maps

Google Earth KLM download for permafrost monitoring in Google Earth Application




.

Last edited by paul; 07/09/08 05:15 PM.

3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
J
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
J
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
Paul.

That is an interesting thread that began back in 2006. Beyond the fact that the pictures you included are from Manitoba and not Ontario, we have known that the treeline has been shifting north for a long time. That the permafrost is melting is a good thing. It means more food growing land for all creatures including humans. A study was done on the stumps that are north of the tree line. It shows various dates where the tree line was even farther north than it was in 1997.

Quote:
By the way, the interesting part of this permafrost is that it is at the most southern edge of its occurrance. This is by no means the Arctic, but the Mid Boreal zone.


What? Post 740720 from your link says there is permafrost within the boreal forest near the northern shore of Lake Winnipeg? Wow. This is interesting indeed, but what does melting permafrost have to do with claiming that "chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature"?

Oh, and your 1981 jetta has two entries in the mileage table from your link:

Code:
1981 	VOLKSWAGEN 	JETTA 	4 		M5 	25 	40
1981 	VOLKSWAGEN 	JETTA 	4 		M5 	41 	57


Is there a reason you did not report the 40 mpg too?

The current gasoline version gets 21/29 mpg. Their website does not show detailed specs for the diesel version. And don't forget that diesel gas has much more sulfer than does gasoline.

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
Canuck Offline OP
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
samwise gamgee - I'm starting to wonder if you and Paul are the same people. You're starting to make the same level of sense.

Did I paraphrase your esteemed idol, oracle, pope, scientist Dr Hansen? Of course, I thought that would have been obvious. But since you were unable to put two and two together, I'll do it for you.
Here's his quote
Originally Posted By: Hansen

CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.

Why does Hansen think energy exec's should be put on trial?
Because.....
Originally Posted By: Hansen

fossil companies choose to spread doubt about global warming

Do you now understand where the topic heading came from?
Hansen thinks certain people should be tried for high crimes against humanity, because they choose to spread doubt about GW. I'm presuming since he thinks they should be tried, he also thinks they are guilty - and should therefore be jailed.

Listen to his interview if you want to
http://wamu.org/audio/dr/08/06/r1080623-20635.asx
It's around minute 45-46, you can listen to him stumble along when the interviewer asks him point blank about his suggested "trials"

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
samwise gamgee - I'm starting to wonder if you and Paul are the same people.


hmmm...I wonder?
yep..sam in the lord of the rings...

samwise gamgee



your post are getting a bit tattered lately ,

Quote:
But since you were unable to put two and two together, I'll do it for you.


I get 4 or 22

Quote:
Hansen thinks certain people should be tried for high crimes against humanity, because they choose to spread doubt about GW.


well if I sold a product that was known to be hazardous to human health and I continued to sell that product after the fact
( knowlege of its harmfull results if used ), and I spread missinformation about that product to the public while others were trying to warn the public of the dangers of its use , would you think that I could be tried for spreading doubt
about the dangers of my product?

or would it be more realistic to think that I could be tried for selling that product to the public knowing of the harm its use would bring?

fact is the public has been warned over and over again , they really believe that fosil fuels are causing global warming , its just that they dont have a reasonable choice to choose from in order to stop hurting the environment / climate.

its like cigarette smokers , they dont have a choice to buy cheap low tar and nicotine cigarettes , the lowest tar and nicotine cigarettes are also the most expensive , just like the cleanest cars are the most expensive , if you want something that wont hurt you as much , then by golly your going to have to pay much more for it.

but cigarette companies , oil companies , auto manufacturers are in buisness to make money , not to help people quit using their products.

.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
J
JRW Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
Originally Posted By: paul

well if I sold a product that was known to be hazardous to human health and I continued to sell that product after the fact
( knowlege of its harmfull results if used ), and I spread missinformation about that product to the public while others were trying to warn the public of the dangers of its use , would you think that I could be tried for spreading doubt
about the dangers of my product?

or would it be more realistic to think that I could be tried for selling that product to the public knowing of the harm its use would bring?

fact is the public has been warned over and over again , they really believe that fosil fuels are causing global warming , its just that they dont have a reasonable choice to choose from in order to stop hurting the environment / climate.

its like cigarette smokers , they dont have a choice to buy cheap low tar and nicotine cigarettes , the lowest tar and nicotine cigarettes are also the most expensive , just like the cleanest cars are the most expensive , if you want something that wont hurt you as much , then by golly your going to have to pay much more for it.

but cigarette companies , oil companies , auto manufacturers are in buisness to make money , not to help people quit using their products.

.


Ok Paul

The Green people, pushed congress with the money they have and Lobbyist's to get filament light bulbs replaced with, hmm what are they?
Green Eco friendly bulbs, energy saving light bulbs.

Oh my WHAT? they are filled with mercury vapors? If you break one you need a Hazmat team to inspect the area for contamination!!!
Now by 2012 we have to use mercury vapor bulbs. So when do we start the law suits?

Because I am not going to pay for a hazmat team to come and tell me if my home is safe to live in if a mercury bulb breaks in my house. Who will be held responsible for any mercury posioning that may happen to my self or my family?
I've already broken one bulb, WHO DO I SUE? (GE/NBC)

The planet has been gowing warming and cooling periods hmm since, well since Day 1. And mand kind is just a flea on the ass of the dog.
But I did hear if every one in China jumped at the same time that would cause the world to crack. Also did you know if ever one on the east cost
throws a rock in the Atlantic ocean at the same time they would cause an tsunami.

People choose to smoke, people choose to drive hybrid cars.

Global Warming is a Fact. nothing man can do can effect global climate except a nuclear war.


Earth is going to warm and cool. That is a fact. Even if every one ate beens and passed gas on the same night at the same time. it wouldn't caust a brush fire in Scotland.


JRW
ps, your going to die some day,
deal with it it is part of life,
hmm one could even say it is natural, kinda like the weather.

Last edited by JRW; 07/10/08 05:42 AM.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
J
JRW Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
oh ya, shesh, save money, let the forests burn for once.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
JRW
Quote:
Oh my WHAT? they are filled with mercury vapors? If you break one you need a Hazmat team to inspect the area for contamination!!!
Now by 2012 we have to use mercury vapor bulbs. So when do we start the law suits?


theres 100 times the amount of mercury in a single amalgam filling , if they do start the lawsuits , I think they would start suing the amalgam companies first wouldnt you?

have they been sued already?

or could it be that 100 times the amount of mercury inside a CFL bulb is considered to be safe inside of a persons mouth for the durration of his life?


Quote:
One CFL contains a hundred times less mercury than is found in a single dental amalgam filling or old-style glass thermometer, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070518-cfls-bulbs.html

fluorescent bulbs have been used for decades now , they are everywhere you go , just try and find a store that does not use them , and the long 4 , 6, 8 ,10 , 12 ft lights have mercury in them as well only more of it I expect , so why all the opposition to using them , they are already being used everywhere

Quote:
According to a recent report by the Washington, D.C.-based Earth Policy Institute, a worldwide shift to CFLs would permit the closing of more than 270 coal-fired power plants. Switching to CFLs in the U.S. alone could save the energy output of 80 plants.

For environmentalists, the clincher is that by requiring less energy, CFLs will actually cut down on mercury pollution produced by coal burning, and EPA agrees.

"By using less electricity, CFLs help reduce mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants, which are the largest source of human-caused mercury emissions in the United States," said agency press officer Ernest Jones.


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070518-cfls-bulbs_2.html

What Bulb is it that does so much GOOD its This Bulb !!


.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Originally Posted By: Canuck
samwise gamgee - I'm starting to wonder if you and Paul are the same people. You're starting to make the same level of sense.

Did I paraphrase your esteemed idol, oracle, pope, scientist Dr Hansen? Of course, I thought that would have been obvious. But since you were unable to put two and two together, I'll do it for you. Here's his quote
Originally Posted By: Hansen
CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.
Why does Hansen think energy exec's should be put on trial? Because.....
Originally Posted By: Hansen
fossil companies choose to spread doubt about global warming
Do you now understand where the topic heading came from?
Hansen thinks certain people should be tried for high crimes against humanity, because they choose to spread doubt about GW. I'm presuming since he thinks they should be tried, he also thinks they are guilty - and should therefore be jailed.

Listen to his interview if you want to
http://wamu.org/audio/dr/08/06/r1080623-20635.asx
It's around minute 45-46, you can listen to him stumble along when the interviewer asks him point blank about his suggested "trials"
===

Paul, thanks for the link on the hobbit stuff. I was wondering what gamgee meant.... I guess it's a compliment?
===

Originally Posted By: paul
I get 4 or 22


Thanks Paul, that was my best laugh of the day (it was kind of a slow day).
===

Sorry Canuck, but those quote marks had been bugging me for weeks!
On a forum where authoritative citations are important....

Originally Posted By: Canuck
Of course, I thought that would have been obvious.
smile

Of course (after reading the article) your attention grabbing headline
was all too obvious as hyperbole.
Originally I thought your title (or headline) was referring to
ordinary folks who (through lack of education or access to
information) might be "non-believers." After reading the article, I
could see you meant the executives that Hansen had been talking about.

I wouldn't call them "non-believers" though, because they do believe.
I'm sure they check the science carefully, looking for good news.
I think Hansen's objection was to their active promotion in others, of apostacy.
But as Paul indicates, it's just that they want to protect their asses assets.

I also was sure I heard some sincerity (or was it actual seething), in
that vitriolic name-calling, when I read your original post.
It put me in mind of the quote,
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." - William Shakespeare (Hamlet)

...but of course, picking on the topic's title was (IMHO) a better
rhetorical device for highlighting that sort of ad hominem,
"attention grabbing" protestation.

smile

p.s. I was searching for my comments on that "lame uiuc" graph, and ran across this from August 12, 2007:
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=23155#Post23155
"I will do my utmost to can the hyperbole, and general bad-attitude, when posting from now on." -Canuck
I'm sure there's been lots of improvement; but maybe there's still some room....

wink


Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
J
JRW Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
Originally Posted By: paul

What Bulb is it that does so much GOOD its This Bulb !!


Just like ethanol will help with getting off of oil. And we are seeing how that is playing out.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57426
remove parts of the carpet for clean up?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23694819/

yet another one
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,362102,00.html

and if they are not such a health risk why the CFL condom?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/science/08obcfl.html?ref=environment

Just how many people are going to be aware of how to clean up after a breakage?
http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index.htm


Just watch as that $5 light bulb turns into a $2000 clean up.
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=aa7796aa-e4a5-4c06-be84-b62dee548fda&p=2

CLFs are not going to be recycled properly, they are going to end up in land fills, like they have been for the last 50 years.

Paul you should know there is a big differnce between a a dental filling, and Inhaling mercury vaper, I would hope.

Lead paint and Asbestos were considered a good idea at one time.

Imagine a CLF breaking, like your dog passing gas. it happend you inhaled, and damn its too late.

I can post links too.
Also did any of you consider this, With CLFs, the power companys are going to lose revenue, so that means power rates will go up.

Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
J
JRW Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
But then again, I forget, most of you think Global Warming is caused by humanity, and not a natural cycle of nature.

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
JWR,
Welcome to the forum. You've got a lot of good points about the
CFL's (especially about the comparison with dental fillings).
I can't believe that they market these without some sort of
buy-back program for recycling, safety, etc.

The first one I put in (back when they first came out)
was broken the first day! It was bigger than a regular bulb,
and the garage door hit it when opening. But we had no clue back then,
so we just swept it up. At least it was kinda outside.
Hey, how many others played with mercury back when they were kids?
I wanted to, but only the cool kids got to roll it around in their palms.

CFL's win out, in a trade-off for the reduced mercury
(not released) by the coal not burned that would have powered regular bulbs
(or words to that effect).
But regionally, some folks don't consume mercury producing power,
so it's more of a philosophical or just economical thing, I guess
(...if they even know about their own energy source).

It does seem appropriate that we assume some of the risk from the mercury,
as a trade-off for reducing the mercury emissions and
subsequent risk to the environment.
As intelligent beings living in a modern world, we should be responsible for
knowing about the various risks in our surroundings; although I do think
the manufacturers/distributors should also foster, enhance, and facilitate that responsibility.
===

Originally Posted By: JRW
Also did any of you consider this, With CLFs, the power companys are going to lose revenue,
so that means power rates will go up.

Isn't that contrary to the "Law of Supply & Demand?"
Wouldn't they need to reduce the cost, or find a new or alternative cheaper supply?

About the environment thing....
Whether or not we're "causing" problems, we know we can affect the climate regionally
because we've been doing that inadvertently for thousands of years through deforestation,
certain agricultural practices, and the over-harvesting of populations.
As a species that has recently become globally distributed and is
(I think) the most populace mammal on the planet, should it be surprising that
we are now affecting the climate on a global scale also
(beyond it's natural variation)? confused
Whatcha think...?

Thanks,
smile

p.s. Shouldn't we be more advertent?

Last edited by samwik; 07/12/08 11:33 PM. Reason: Format & add p.s.

Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
J
JRW Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 8
Sawmilk,

Global warming has been happining long before mankind threw the first log on the fire, and will happen long after we are we are fossils in the ground. So I find it hard to believe we are affecting the climate on a global scale. Man made global warming is nothing but a hoax, great for tax revenue fromm the uneducated, good for tenure if your a professor trying to get government grants. Don't propose the fear, no grant money for you.

The science behind huminanity causing global warming is flawed, by greed and self intrests...



btw, I was here under the name John Warren, but recently moved and forgot my password.

I do believe in climate change, but its just natural and will always happen.

I see no differnce with CLFs in ones home compaired to lead paint. Do not beleive all the BS put out by NBC/GE.



Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Originally Posted By: JRW
I see no differnce with CLFs in ones home compaired to lead paint. Do not beleive all the BS put out by NBC/GE.

So you think CFL's are bad and should be banned?
I used to think it was crazy to put out that many "packets of mercury,"
but they sure make the savings and trade-off seem worthwhile.
Do you think the numbers are wrong?
===

...Well, welcome back then John W.
~ smile

...but I'd still like to quote:

"Human activities are altering the atmosphere and oceans, transforming ecosystems,
and changing the climate over and above natural variation."
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/quest/

...they also say:
"Economic benefits of environmental science: (24 Nov. 2006)
NERC-funded environmental science is worth hundreds of millions of pounds
to the UK economy according to an independent study."

hmmmm.... Is that the "greed and self intrests..." part?

wink


Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5