How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 When Everything Old is New Again   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

When Everything Old is New Again

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


25 posted 12-23-2009 08:02 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Ess, my "trying to delay it" would have little affect. No one thinks I'm that powerful, with the exception of my dog.

Interesting how the term "We need to do something" is used so much these days. It was used on the stimulus bill, cap and trade, health care and the environment.

I don't disagree that things can, and should, be done. As with health care, things can be done without a political takeover of the system. Things can also be done that do not cost billions of dollars and further tax an over-taxed world. When countries get together and talk about destruction of the planet, when they paint oceans swallowing up islands in the near future, when they show videos of a small child hanging on to a tree branch while the world is destroyed  beneath her, you are talking about a scam. You are talking about governments getting together with a gimmick to exercise more power over people and higher taxes. You are talking about individuals getting rich....right, Al? Grandpa used to say, "Never buy anything from anyone out of breath". These people, along with Obama and health care, are out of breath, setting up ficticious deadlines that must be met to avoid doom and destruction.

DOing something is fine as long as what you are doing makes sense. To just DO something for the sake of acting, doesn't. I haven't seen anything come out of these conferences that handle specifics or a plan. Yes, they come up with percentages of targets to lower the co2 levels by a specific date (which varies greatly). They don't really say how. Yes, they speak of throwing money to poorer or developing nations, who may or may not use the money on environmental issues and, if not, there is no enforcement. They exempt two of the three largest polluters by naming them developing countries which sets up the laughable scenario of the US borrowing money from China to give to China for environmental reasons.

If they were to say, "We need to get together to work on cleaning up the atmosphere, which will provide a better quality of life for all" or something along those lines, they would be believeable...but there's no power grab in that. Instead, they paint their scenarios of death and destruction, ice caps disintegrating, islands disappearing, polar bears wandering aimlessly  over small pieces of ice, and all of the horrendous events that will occur SOON - unless billions get thrown around, governmental controls get tightened and taxpayers pay more....and their chant is "Well, we gotta do something!"

Yep, they are doing something. So did Madoff..
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


26 posted 12-23-2009 07:46 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Ive recently read an article about Greens urging that
people make their pet dogs either vegetarian or get
rid of them all together because a dog has the same
annual carbon footprint as an SUV, ( cats are
argued against as well but those being carnivores the choices
are even more limited.).  At the beginning of the twentieth
century there were some one and a half billion human beings
on the planet, (there were more people alive in the
twentieth century than in all the previous 10,000 years
combined), where as at the end there were six billion,
(most bigger than a dog or cat).  By 2050 there will be
an estimated nine billion, but the increases overwhelmingly
have and will be outside the West where were it not for
immigration populations would decline, (indeed in some
countries in Europe the decline will occur regardless).
So what does anyone suggest as a solution if the problem
really isnt us, (meaning the West)?

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


27 posted 12-23-2009 11:36 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     The problem is us, meaning people, I do believe, John.  When we talk about global warming we are really only talking about half of the problem, which is the effect that this sort of climate change has on the human ability to support itself on this planet without going into a series of wars over food, water, land and scarce resources.  While China is being somewhat jerky about what they're doing about the climate change side of things, you really can't fault them for being willing to tackle the population side of the deal head on.  Eventually, they'll have to deal with the climate side of things too, but they've already got a very large lead on us overall and are better positioned for the coming century or two than I think we are.  At least they're not in total denial.

     Most of the rest of the world seems to be, including us.  I don't know that abortion needs to be part of the solution, but we need to do something about population and food and clear and available water.  The water stuff was never much of an issue for me when I lived in the east.  I mean that I never actually felt it.  Out here in Southern California, it's something that I've gotten to be pretty aware of.  I think it'll become a larger issue in the next ten years or so.

     Dealing with just half of the thing won't work by itself.  It's probably simply cosmetic, in my opinion; but there are HUGE cultural and religious problems in dealing with population.  I think it's a virtual political third rail.

     Anyway, that's what I think.

     Climate is half the problem.  We need to deal with the whole thing.  That means, of course, we need to deal with climate as well, which is not going to sound like good news, I'm afraid, to my friends on the right, but I think it's true as well.

    
All my best to all of you.  I'll be heading out of town for a week or so with Elaine.  I'll be here tomorrow, though.  

Best, Mr Bob
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


28 posted 12-24-2009 03:57 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Balladeer

I agree with much of what you say.  All I am pointing out is that the cause is still good, even if the work put into it still has yet to find much solid ground. Many revolutionary changes for the better begin with varying doubts,  difficulties, contraversy, mistakes, etc.   This is no exception.  But that doesn't make the cause no longer worth the care and effort.
 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


29 posted 12-24-2009 04:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

True enough, Ess, but what do they say the road to hell is paved with...?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


30 posted 12-24-2009 05:32 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


What is the average number of children per family unit,
(if possible excluding first generation immigrants), in the United States
and countries of the West, (in which I include Japan), versus
other countries?  I think the numbers show that the West is already making its
contribution by not replacing itself.    I for example can say
I personally know of only one woman in my entire life that had more
than two children in a single marriage.


.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


31 posted 12-24-2009 06:14 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mike,

          Borrowing money from China to give to China is a telling point.  I say ouch! to you.

     The Chinese limiting population to one child per family and for the most part doing so successfully has helped them address the same set of problems from the other side, however:  less pressure on scarce resources such as food and water overall.  I think that in terms of negotiations with the Chinese, it's probably smart not to make a large thing of this, since we do want them to cut pollution and various other emissions that really need to be regulated.

     We do cough from Chinese sulfur, I think, and suffer from Chinese nitrous oxide, and have to deal with Chinese acid rain.   At the same time, we drown in a wave of cheap chinese goods that have put our own guys out of work.  We ought to insist that they at least pay to not kill us with chemicals so we can continue to pay them interest on the money we owe them on the jobs we exported in the first place.  

     If they paid the cost of the clean up, we'd have to pay a fair price for the goods.  Maybe we wouldn't buy so many of theirs and would buy more of our own.

     Confused enough for you?  My head's spinning.

     We do have to do things to change the ecological problems around.

     Your question about what, however, seems off the mark.  We are already doing things.  We have deregulated lots of stuff that should be regulated, and raised the levels of many pollutants that we already know to be harmful, including, if you'll remember from the early Bush years, levels of arsenic in drinking water.  We did these things at the behest of industries who felt they were being held back by what they felt were unnecessary regulation.

     Do you remember this the same way that I do?

     Perhaps your memory is different, and it would be useful to get your perception in here as well.  

     But in 2007 that noted singing group, The Supremes, decided that the EPA had the authority without congress to regulate the levels of these things without checking with congress.  There was not complaint at the time from congress that I recall, nor prom the presidency, though there is now from the GOP now that they are in the minority position and it appears that the EPA must act to restore the deregulated or poorly regulated levels of these toxic chemicals to safe levels.  It was the GOP's Supreme's, by and large, by the way, that seems to have set the rules, and now it's the GOP in congress that's doing the complaining.  

     The GOP, it seems, wants the industrial base to have the freedom to kill, poison and maim the population at large in what the GOP deems to be the best interests of . . . the population at large.  In the opinion of the GOP.

     So, here's my proposition:

     We take an environmental proposal that clearly did not work.

     In this case, that would be deregulating or underregulating stuff that is clearly poison to the population at large, and has be ajudged be so by a supreme court essentially chosen by the Republican party, who has given power to a government agency to use power to change the situation.

     We then re-regulate those poisons.

     We also establish benchmarks for seeing if the changes make any difference.

     We fight about the benchmarks after we do the regulation, so that they don't prevent the regulations from going in place.

     We make a list of other poisons we wish to regulate, and a set of dates they will be banned.  We offer the option of benchmarks to judge how successful those actions will be, and offer the option of them being put into place before the ban, though not having any affect on whether or not the ban actually takes place.

     The  objectivity of the benchmarks will be judged by scientists noted for their objectivity and indifference to politics.

     The continued ban of these chemicals will be decided by how well the chemicals do against the benchmarks.

     There you have at least a proposal.

     If the road to wherever is paved with good intentions, as you've pointed out, with all good intentions, in your last post, I would counter with the fact that in terms of the difficulties in my proposal, the road to heaven is paved with doubts and uncertainties.

     Your suggestion simply keeps people from budging at all.

     Sincerely, Bob Kaven

Merry Christmas, to you, and Happy New Year as well.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


32 posted 12-24-2009 06:37 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The GOP, it seems, wants the industrial base to have the freedom to kill, poison and maim the population at large in what the GOP deems to be the best interests of . . . the population at large.  In the opinion of the GOP.

Bob, you continue with the unparalled ability to kill a conversation with the most inane accusations imaginable.

I leave you to your thoughts. Since I am GOP-biased, I must be one of those eager to kill, poison and maim the population so there is little sense in trying to defend any position I support.

I shall now lace Christmas cookies with arsenic to teach those bothersome carolers a lesson.

Have a good Christmas, Bob....
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


33 posted 12-24-2009 09:12 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

quote:
but what do they say the road to hell is paved with...?


...the means to over come it.   It is better to make an inroad on it, then it make an inroad on you.
 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


34 posted 12-24-2009 09:23 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

An appropriate thought on Christmas Eve...Merry Christmas to you, sir.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


35 posted 12-24-2009 10:54 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Best wishings Balladeer.  Have a great Christmas and New Year.  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


36 posted 12-25-2009 01:25 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Merry Christmas, Everyone!

     Mike, I passed out those cookies to the orphans you designated.  They said they especially like the funny almond cookies, but the cookies were all gone by the time I got around to trying one, and the orphans had all taken an afternoon nap.  The teachers said the the kids usually had more energy than that, but nobody had the heart to wake them; they looked so peaceful and all.  

     I hadn't known that you enjoyed baking so much for charity events!

All my best, Bob Kaven

See you in a week or so.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


37 posted 12-26-2009 12:28 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Here is a good description from David Beerling's Emerald Planet:


"The long-term cycling of carbon dioxide between the Earth's rocky crust, the oceans, and the atmosphere operates as a thermostat to prevent the climate becoming too hot or too cold; analogous devices perform the same purpose in car engines and domestic central heating systems.  The planetary thermostat operates even in the absence of life and works because the weathering of silicate rocks, which consumes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, is strongly dependent on temperature.   Warmer climates accelerate weathering, lowering the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere, while cooler climates decelerate it.  Imagine a situation reminiscent of early Earth, when excessive volcanic activity liberated enormous quantities of carbon dioxide from the mantle and released it into the atmosphere.  A carbon-dioxide-rich atmosphere creates a warm greenhouse climate that promotes the weathering of rocks, consumes carbon dioxide from the air, and weakens the greenhouse effect.  The net effect is a cooler climate.  Because a warm climate can lead to a cooler one, and a cool climate to a warmer one, the feedback loop is said to be a negative or stabilizing feedback.  It has likely prevented runaway planetary warming on Earth for the last billion years or so.  Unfortunately, it takes from hundreds of thousands to millions of years and is far too slow to counteract human-induced global warming.

The thermostatic control of global climate by this slow cycling of rocks, oceans, and atmosphere operates in the absence of life, and so can explain what has gone "wrong" with the climate of other planets.  Consider, for example, our neighbouring planets Venus and Mars.  Surface temperatures on Venus are in excess of 460 C  and on Mars typically -55 C, occasionally dipping to -140C.  Climate regulation on both planets has clearly failed.  What went wrong?   Why didn't their climate stabilize to be "just right"?  The reason appears to be that, because Venus is situated much closer to the Sun than Earth, whatever water it was originally endowed with simply boiled off.  Obviously, no water means no rain, and no rain halts rock weathering and prevents the removal of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes.  Consequently, Venus is a hot, dry planet with a carbon-dioxide-rich atmosphere.  The situation on Mars is quite different because it is further away from the Sun, with a surface temperature far below the freezing point of water.  The answer to the question of what went wrong in this case is more speculative.  The main cause seems to be Mars' small size; it is half the diameter of Earth and its interior cooled off much more quickly.  Without being able to maintain a molten core, volcanoes on Mars soon went extinct, breaking the chain of carbon cycling as they ceased to act as conduits returning carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.   Eventually most of the carbon dioxide became locked up in the crust of the Red Planet, putting it out of commission in the job of climate regulation.

Mars and Venus hightlight the fragility of the carbon dioxide-weathering-climate thermostat."
 

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


38 posted 12-26-2009 07:05 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Beerling assumes no background in plant biochemistry, anatomy, physiology, or taxonomy, or in geochemistry, ecology, or the numerous other disciplines he draws on.

The professor seems to be an intelligent individual but, after reading some of his things, I think he works mainly by conjecture when he doesn't have facts. That's fine and will sell books but not an authority I would be willing to quote as being factual.

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


39 posted 12-26-2009 11:03 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Balladeer,

Trying to write someone off based on some one-liner you found is a bit ignorant.  If you do a little research, you will find out what his academic background and honours actually are:    

From The Emerald Planet:

"David Beerling is Professor of Palaeoclimatology at the University of Sheffield and the 2008-2009 Edward P.Bass Distinguished Visiting Enviromental Scholar at the Yale Institute for Biospheric Studies.   Before this he held a Royal Society University Research Fellowship.  His work on the evolution of life and the physical enviroment was recognized by the award of a prestigious Philip Leverhulme Prize in Earth Sciences in 2001.  He has published many papers in scientific journals and is co-author of Vegetation and the Terrestrial Carbon Cycle: Modelling the first 400 years (Cambridge University Press, 2001). "


But none of that adresses the points he brings up.   If you disagree with something he says, you are as free as anyone else to argue it and show what you find faulty about it.
 

[This message has been edited by Essorant (12-27-2009 12:57 AM).]

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


40 posted 12-26-2009 11:28 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

I just found whence you got those words from:http://dannyreviews.com/h/Emerald_Planet.html

"Beerling assumes no background in plant biochemistry, anatomy, physiology, or taxonomy, or in geochemistry, ecology, or the numerous other disciplines he draws on. And he provides just enough background for the reader, without getting bogged down. If Emerald Planet is aimed at a general audience, however, it has documentation for the scientists: some sixty pages of endnotes, with references into the scientific literature. "

Are you sure this is trying to make a statement about the author's background instead of the author's assumptions about the background the readers have/don't have about such subjects?  
 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


41 posted 12-27-2009 08:50 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Trying to write someone off based on some one-liner you found is a bit ignorant.

Enjoy your holidays, sir..
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> When Everything Old is New Again   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors