Global Warming

[Columcille]

There will be no North Pole in thirty years? Ok, don't blame America. Blame the Communist Chinese. Get your UN resolutions to impact the real polluters. As is, Trinity, your bankrupting us with your moral support of Obama. I remember hearing about the pollution in China by newscasters covering the Olympics, you could actually see how bad the pollution was. I have lived in some big cities before, but the pollutions was not even close to what appears in some of the developing nations. I as an American, can only do my part where I live... but your incompetent UN, with its irresolute resolutions, its inability to stop the Iranians in their development of nuclear enrichment and the North Koreans testing its own underground nuclear test and missle launches is going to lend more pollution to our environment. If a dirty bomb hits the states because of an upcoming terrorist attack, I will blame in on the current president's weak policies and the UN's lack of resolve and commitment.

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by Columcille

There will be no North Pole in thirty years? Ok, don't blame America. Blame the Communist Chinese. Get your UN resolutions to impact the real polluters. As is, Trinity, your bankrupting us with your moral support of Obama. I remember hearing about the pollution in China by newscasters covering the Olympics, you could actually see how bad the pollution was. I have lived in some big cities before, but the pollutions was not even close to what appears in some of the developing nations. I as an American, can only do my part where I live... but your incompetent UN, with its irresolute resolutions, its inability to stop the Iranians in their development of nuclear enrichment and the North Koreans testing its own underground nuclear test and missle launches is going to lend more pollution to our environment. If a dirty bomb hits the states because of an upcoming terrorist attack, I will blame in on the current president's weak policies and the UN's lack of resolve and commitment.

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions

We are all responsible. This is not a question of patriotism. This is a threat for the survival of the human specie. The Western world is polluting much more than the Eastern World at this time.

By the way, there is also some thick smog on many american cities. Los Angeles is a good example.

Trinity

[Columcille]

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?...ntentID=254017

Seems the five biggest cities are mostly in the East, not the West. In fact, it lists the micrograms for LA as being 36 and New York as 22 and this was in 2002. I guess you could say Cairo is West, but it certainly is not in North America. Trinity, better have some real facts about the real polluters. Your generalization is false because it lacks chronological order. Look at your own website you gave; the list given is back in 2004. The references given below in footnote 2 shows China is a greater pollutant than America. Now, what is the UN going to do about it? Tax America with emission cap and trade and reward the Chinese by non-interference. What a great policy to end human pollution, you don't want to tick off the military power that has no concern about its own human rights violations.

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by Columcille

Seems the five biggest cities are mostly in the East, not the West. In fact, it lists the micrograms for LA as being 36 and New York as 22 and this was in 2002. I guess you could say Cairo is West, but it certainly is not in North America. Trinity, better have some real facts about the real polluters. Your generalization is false because it lacks chronological order. Look at your own website you gave; the list given is back in 2004. The references given below in footnote 2 shows China is a greater pollutant than America. Now, what is the UN going to do about it? Tax America with emission cap and trade and reward the Chinese by non-interference. What a great policy to end human pollution, you don't want to tick off the military power that has no concern about its own human rights violations.

Top Ten CO2 Producing Nations

"Carbon Dioxide is a global problem, but the countries that produce the greatest amount per person are in North America, Europe and Australia. If Carbon Dioxide reductions are to be made, the lead has to be taken by people living in these countries. Most Carbon Dioxide in these countries comes from burning fossil fuels, such as coal, gas and oil to heat buildings (including homes) and transport. Of course, Carbon Dioxide is also given off by all living things, but in general plants capture as much as animals and micro-organisms generate. In contrast, Carbon Dioxide produced by burning fuel adds to the gases in the atmosphere and cannot be captured by plants."
http://www.solcomhouse.com/toptenco2.htm


"The United States is the world leader, producing almost 25% of the total CO2 emissions worldwide. China shows the most rapid increase in CO2 emissions, and Canada is the world leader in per capita CO2 emissions."
http://www.coalitionforcleanair.org/...ming-faqs.html

It is in the interest of all the great industrial nations to solve this vital problem. There will be no winner but we will all be affected at the end.

The rich nations around the world have invested 5 trillions of dollars (5,000 billions) to save the american model (economy) from the bankruptcy. We can do the same thing with the Global Warning threat.

By the way, last week, the China has invested 100 billions more to help the world to come out of this economic mess.

The only country in the world who had no problem with his banks is my country. Our banking system was cited as a model to follow during the last G20. There is good ideas everywhere for escaping the Global warning, even from China.

Trinity

[Columcille]

I don't want China's money, I want Capitalism to win out, not socialism. Let the big companies fail, most of them have been run down by unions anyways. As far as the environment is concerned... CO2 emission by countries is one thing... put that in perspective of landm*** and you have some serious conflict. You also have to figure in things that counteract CO2 emissions, things like trees and forests. America has some great environmental resources protected in our national parks. You just reference the countries without context as to their landm*** and you belittle China's environmental impact.

China’s land m*** is 3,600,927 sq miles and is about 41,000 sq miles larger than the United States.
The population of China is about 1.32 BILLION people, representing almost a fifth of the earth’s population. A lot of CO2 from people, would you not say?

http://www.newscientist.com/data/ima...6515-1_996.jpg

Here is a better picture of the dirt.

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by Columcille

You also have to figure in things that counteract CO2 emissions, things like trees and forests. America has some great environmental resources protected in our national parks. http://www.newscientist.com/data/ima...6515-1_996.jpg

North Pole and South Pole

"Western Siberia is the world's largest peat bog, a one million square kilometer region of permafrost peat bog that was formed 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age. The melting of its permafrost is likely to lead to the release, over decades, of large quan***ies of methane. As much as 70,000 million tonnes of methane, an extremely effective greenhouse gas, might be released over the next few decades, creating an additional source of greenhouse gas emissions. Similar melting has been observed in eastern Siberia."

Forests

"Pine forests in British Columbia have been devastated by a pine beetle infestation, which has expanded unhindered since 1998 at least in part due to the lack of severe winters since that time; a few days of extreme cold kill most mountain pine beetles and have kept outbreaks in the past naturally contained. The infestation, which (by November 2008) has killed about half of the province's lodgepole pines (33 million acres or 135,000 km2) is an order of magnitude larger than any previously recorded outbreak and p***ed via unusually strong winds in 2007 over the continental divide to Alberta. An epidemic also started, be it at a lower rate, in 1999 in Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana. The United States forest service predicts that between 2011 and 2013 virtually all 5 million acres (20,000 km2) of Colorado’s lodgepole pine trees over five inches (127 mm) in diameter will be lost.
As the northern forests are a carbon sink, while dead forests are a major carbon source, the loss of such large areas of forest has a positive feedback on global warming. In the worst years, the carbon emission due to beetle infestation of forests in British Columbia alone approaches that of an average year of forest fires in all of Canada or five years worth of emissions from that country's transportation sources.

Besides the immediate ecological and economic impact, the huge dead forests provide a fire risk. Even many healthy forests appear to face an increased risk of forest fires because of warming climates. The 10-year average of boreal forest burned in North America, after several decades of around 10,000 km² (2.5 million acres), has increased steadily since 1970 to more than 28,000 km² (7 million acres) annually. Though this change may be due in part to changes in forest management practices, in the western U.S., since 1986, longer, warmer summers have resulted in a fourfold increase of major wildfires and a sixfold increase in the area of forest burned, compared to the period from 1970 to 1986. A similar increase in wildfire activity has been reported in Canada from 1920 to 1999.

Forest fires in Indonesia have dramatically increased since 1997 as well. These fires are often actively started to clear forest for agriculture. They can set fire to the large peat bogs in the region and the CO2 released by these peat bog fires has been estimated, in an average year, to be 15% of the quan***y of CO2 produced by fossil fuel combustion."

Effects of global warming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_warming

You just reference the countries without context as to their landm*** and you belittle China's environmental impact. The population of China is about 1.32 BILLION people, representing almost a fifth of the earth’s population. A lot of CO2 from people, would you not say?

Canada is eleventh per capita for the emissions of the CO2, and China has the ninety-one rank. The United States is just behind us at the tenth rank. Most of the people in China are living in the rural territories. We the Canadians have the second largest country in the world [after the Russia] and the life style is very high here. We are a bunch of avid consumers and we produce a lot of CO2.

Carbon dioxide emissions per capita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ons_per_capita

CO2 emission per capita per year per country


Your country and my country, together, we are causing much more pollution than China. Per capita we are four times higher than China.

Trinity

[Columcille]

In terms of actually viewing the pollution, I see your maps always demonstrate a national mentality rather than where the pollution actually resides. It suggests for me that New York, NY is no different than Sante Fe/Espanola, NM in your eyes. The map I gave at least demonstrates where the highest concentration of pollution is. Which is clearly in China as well as up around the New England states. Perhaps China is doing something about it. Legal abortions, even mandating them, will help cut CO2 emissions from less people breathing and using energy or buying products from industrial plants. They are the real comp***ionate ones.


Wanted to add one more thing...

You stated the following:

Your country and my country, together, we are causing much more pollution than China. Per capita we are four times higher than China.

If you recall, the landm*** of China is greater than the United States. So combining our landm***es together and saying we are producing more CO2 than China just dilutes the perception. We could take your argument further and add the whole world against China and get the same truthful statement that we all produce more than China in CO2 emmisions.

[Trinity]

America's Most Polluted Cities
By Rebecca Ruiz, Forbes
Apr 29th, 2009

This time of year, many Americans are concerned with sunburns. In some areas, they should pay more attention to smog.

The reason? Though invisible, air pollution is a threat to 186 million Americans, according to a new report released by the American Lung ***ociation.

The annual report--State of the Air 2009--found that six in 10 Americans live in counties where ozone or particle pollution has reached dangerous levels. Both types of pollution can be deadly and have been linked to respiratory conditions like asthma, emphysema and bronchitis, and there is also evidence that particle pollution increases risk of heart attacks and strokes.

http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/am...RlZC1jaXRpZXM-

Trinity

[Columcille]

http://www.lungusa.org/

I wish they could make the facts more visual by a county by county color map.
The Forbes articles almost reads more like a columnist section rather than an actual news report. Besides, it seem almost restricted to just our country. How is China in comparison? What do they do for their citizens? I mean, they have socialized medicine. Are they spending even more money, or do they report their findings effectively?

[Columcille]

I wanted to say one more thing about cost of saving in medicine. Everyone is going to die of something, is the costs that they are projecting for savings really just hyped up? I mean if they don't die from asthma, are they just as likely to die of cancer or heart problems or Alzheimers? I mean, if you look at the whole scheme of things, everyone is making their own projection of savings to the medical community should they pump money into their special project. In reality, it is only shifting the death toll to another desease. And let's not forget about the nature of insects to adapt to the environment and crop damages done by them alone. Farmers who protect their farms by pesticides save their crops better than the organic farmers who do not. If it was not true, farmers would save more money by not using pesticides and the organic farmers would make more profit. But let's face it, when we go to the supermarket... just exactly how much more do you pay for that head of lettuce by an organic farmer over those who are not? How much of an environmental impact is the pesticides to us in comparison to the pollution?

That Forbes article is a bunch of toe-the-line Obamamaniacs. Look at the article's solution--which is why it less newsworthy and more an opinion column--"A study done in 2007 by the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that achieving federal air quality standards in the Los Angeles area would cost $2.3 billion per year, but save $14.6 billion."

I'd like to see how many of the 12 board members are Democrats. Is it one party rule, or on occasions do the three appointed by government only make it 3/4 majority when a Republican appoints? Is this agency a grap for power. How do they use the funds? Do they contribute funds back to politicians? Do they pay lobbyists?

[Trinity]

Al Gore warns on latest climate trends

[video]

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/a...te_trends.html

"We can drift along as though there were still a cold war, wasting hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons that will never be used, ignoring the problems of people in this country and around the world, being one of the worst environmental violators on earth, standing against any sort of viable programs to protect the world's forests or to cut down on acid rain or the global warming or ozone depletion. We can ignore human rights violations in other countries, or we can take these things on as true leaders ought to and accept the inspiring challenge of America for the future."-- Jimmy Carter

"We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over." --Arnold Schwarzenegger

"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."--John McCain

"All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingly dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not climate change is real. Not only is it real, it's here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster. The issue of climate change is one that we ignore at our own peril. There may still be disputes about exactly how much we're contributing to the warming of the earth's atmosphere and how much is naturally occurring, but what we can be scientifically certain of is that our continued use of fossil fuels is pushing us to a point of no return. And unless we free ourselves from a dependence on these fossil fuels and chart a new course on energy in this country, we are condemning future generations to global catastrophe." -- Barack Obama

"The superior man seeks what is right; the inferior one, what is profitable."--Confucius

Trinity

[Columcille]

Wpw. they are so unbiased. Moderate Republicans who are spinless and leftist Democrats. They make great bedfellows. Just look at where they all stand on stem-cell research. Mmm. Didn't California spend a lot of money on embryonic stem cell research approved by Arnold? McCains stance was clearly the same as Obama, Obama lifted the Presidential executive order to ban such research. If they had the same concern over life, why do they destroy it?

[asdf]

Originally Posted by Columcille

Wpw. they are so unbiased. Moderate Republicans who are spinless and leftist Democrats. They make great bedfellows.

It's so depressing that this is considered [by some] to be a liberal vs. conservative issue.

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by asdf

It's so depressing that this is considered [by some] to be a liberal vs. conservative issue.

Indeed. There are some people who are seeing only in black or white. They are simply incapable to see something good from their opponents. Anyway, on this issue the Republicans are dead wrong.

Trinity

[Columcille]

trinity, what is conservatism? If you could tell me what the Republican principles is, you would be closer to the answer than me. It used to be a party that stood for something, like a strong defense, limited government, and strong family values. It has been hijacked by the moderates and by the errosion of compromise from which those on the other side of the aisle have not compromised. McCain, Bush, and many of the leaders within the Republican party have not been about limited government but big spenders. Obama's upcoming budget, his continued efforts with the bailouts and "stimulus" spending is even more an error since he promised to go through it "line-by-line."

I veiw conservatism on the family level to be fiscally responsible to live within our means and pay off debt. Government has not been doing this at all for a long time. How is it that Obama, moderate Republicans and Democrats think that to get out of debt you have to spend even more money that we don't have?
How is borrowing money from China, who has their own pollution problems, going to help reduce pollution and at the same time get us out of debt? And if N. Korea hands terrorists the weaponry it needs to attack us and our allies from a dirty bomb going to help the environment? If you are as naive as Obama to criticize the intelligence agencies, reduce spending in defense, and say sorries to the world is going to change N.Korea, Iran, and the terrorists, you obviously fail to see how the criminal mind works in reality.

What is even more a gross error on your part is the attack of conservativism. The Catholic Church is a hallmark of conservativism. Catholicism is for pro-life, is against embryonic stem cell research, and such conservative principle is based on the sanc***y of life, on responsibility in both fiscal spending, in living within our means, and in family values that are against ****sexuality and other perversions from invading the home life. Tradition is conservative because it is long time practice of deep seated principles guided by the continued looking back at the Scriptures and in the authority of the Church's magesterium regarding right doctrine and right morals. We know in our daily lives looking at successful families that it is precisely because they follow conservative principles in fiscal responsibility and precautions such as setting boundaries, teaching children about the value of money rather than spoiling them and bailing them out, and other such things to chores and expectations or goal setting is successful conservative principle, even story telling helps solidify the family in bring it a sense of iden***y. If a family can practice this balance, then we should expect our elected officials to do the same... but they do not. Liberalism does not work in all its high ideals because they lack fiscal responsibility, they lack precautionary measures to secure the homeland (by strong defense) just as in the home if we live in a bad neighborhood one would expect a security system, fire alarms, and in really bad neighborhoods even gated doors and windows. Liberalism also attacks the iden***y of what it means to be an American. With all the apologies coming out of the mouth of Obama to the Middle East and to South America, he should also be telling them about the positive aspects of what America has accomplished so Americans can feel proud to be Americans even when we travel to their land for business or pleasure. If Obama wants to change the world positively, he should know the truthfulness of "speak softly, but carry a big stick" and "actions speak louder than words."

[Trinity]

HOME

Home (trailer):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8IozVfph7I

Website:
http://www.youtube.com/homeproject

Trinity

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by asdf

It's so depressing that this is considered [by some] to be a liberal vs. conservative issue.

Uniting America: Restoring the Vital Center to American Democracy
by Norton Garfinkle (Editor), Daniel Yankelovich (Editor)

http://www.amazon.com/Uniting-Americ...3532707&sr=8-1

"In Uniting America, some of the country’s most prominent social thinkers—among them Francis Fukuyama, Daniel Yankelovich, Amitai Etzioni, Alan Wolfe, Uwe Reinhardt, and Thomas E. Mann—reject the myth of polarization. On topics ranging from the war on terrorism, health care, economic policy, and Social Security to religion, diversity, and immigration, the authors argue that there are sensible, centrist solutions that are more in keeping with prevailing public sentiment and that would better serve the national interest.

On issue after issue, the authors show how the conventional framing of the debate in Washington has misled Americans, creating a series of false dilemmas and forcing choices between two extremes—at the expense of more balanced and pragmatic policy solutions based on enduring American values.

If there is, indeed, an expanding chasm separating the left and right in contemporary American politics, it exists largely as a specter employed by politicians more interested in manipulating voters than creating policies consistent with mainstream America's values. Editors Garfinkle, chairman of the George Washington University Ins***ute for Communitarian Policy Studies, and Yankelovich, founder and chairman of policy research organization Public Agenda, note America has rebounded from periods of great strife and disunity (the turbulence of the '60s and '70s, the Civil War), and the current divides aren't as bad as they could be. Essays examine topics from environmentalism to the war on terror and all conclude compromise is the key to finding acceptable ways to promote a healthy democracy. If the thesis sounds simple enough, the authors also dutifully bolster their case with a barrage of statistics and research (though a not unsubstantial portion of figures are supplied by Yankelovich's Public Agenda) to dispel the notion that the nation is being torn between two poles. Not a light read, the book will be appreciated and debated by scholars and those who work in public policy. Casual readers may soon find themselves in over their heads."

Trinity

[alanmolstad]

it's freezing outside.....we are about to enter April and there is a blizzard?

I have nothing but contempt for the people that say the earth is in trouble.....they have no clue...