Exactly! If everyone just made even the smallest effort to tread a little lighter on the planet, to reuse and recycle, use alternative ways of building our homes, we might just have a world where our children's children don't have to wear gas masks to school.

I always love seeing a little flower grow up through cracks in concrete or an asphalt road. It reminds me that long after we are gone, nature will take back and repair all the damage we have done.

You see you wouldn't ask why the rose that grew from the concrete had damaged petals
On the contrary
We would all celebrate its tenacity
We would all love its will to reach the sun

Tupac Shakur - Mamas just a little girl

Alexandra

Alexandra Avatar

Location: PNW
Gender: Female

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 12:39pm

Rod wrote:

My small effort, starting this month, has been to take my own coffee mug (stainless steel) with me to all the coffeehouses I go to—it's a minimal effort thing, and OH so good for landfills (cardboard production).

And Rod—-RIGHT ON about the flower in the crack.........I'm sure you probably LOVE the Talking Heads song "Nothing But Flowers." {#Good-vibes}

...you got it, you got it.... {#Daisy}

Rod

Gender:

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 12:33pm

Welly wrote:

We do, however, need to discuss how we live on this planet in a manner that doesn't make it uninhabitable.

Welly

Location: Lotusland
Gender: Female

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 12:20pm
cc_rider wrote: Um, there is no need to save the Earth. The Earth is gonna be just fine, regardless of what we humans do. The Earth was around millions of years before we showed up, and it'll be here millions of years after we're gone, no matter what. Just sayin, c. THANKYOU! We do, however, need to discuss how we live on this planet in a manner that doesn't make it uninhabitable.

BasmntMadman

BasmntMadman Avatar

Location: Off-White Gardens

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 12:09pm
cc_rider wrote: Um, there is no need to save the Earth. The Earth is gonna be just fine, regardless of what we humans do. The Earth was around millions of years before we showed up, and it'll be here millions of years after we're gone, no matter what. Just sayin, c. What, and humans won't be around to appreciate these critters? Depressing.

arsenault

arsenault Avatar

Location: long beach cali USandA
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 11:54am

cc_rider wrote:

Um, there is no need to save the Earth. The Earth is gonna be just fine, regardless of what we humans do. The Earth was around millions of years before we showed up, and it'll be here millions of years after we're gone, no matter what.

Just sayin,

c.

true
and what is the correct temp of the planet...?
warmer like it was in roman times....wine in northern england...
or cooler like it was in dickens time...thames frozen regularly...
in terms of time its an eyeblink....

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 11:50am
Um, there is no need to save the Earth. The Earth is gonna be just fine, regardless of what we humans do. The Earth was around millions of years before we showed up, and it'll be here millions of years after we're gone, no matter what. Just sayin, c.

arsenault

arsenault Avatar

Location: long beach cali USandA
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 11:46am

aflanigan wrote:

For the Earth's temperature to be in steady state so that the Earth does not rapidly heat or cool, this absorbed solar radiation must be very closely balanced by energy radiated back to space in the infrared wavelengths. Since the intensity of infrared radiation increases with increasing temperature, one can think of the Earth's temperature as being determined by the infrared flux needed to balance the absorbed solar flux. The visible solar radiation mostly heats the surface, not the atmosphere, whereas most of the infrared radiation escaping to space is emitted from the upper atmosphere, not the surface. The infrared photons emitted by the surface are mostly absorbed in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases and clouds and do not escape directly to space . . .

Quantum mechanics provides the basis for computing the interactions between molecules and radiation. Most of this interaction occurs when the frequency of the radiation closely matches that of the spectral lines of the molecule, determined by the quantization of the modes of vibration and rotation of the molecule . . .

The molecules/atoms that constitute the bulk of the atmosphere: oxygen (O₂), nitrogen (N₂) and argon (Ar); do not interact with infrared radiation significant

In the Earth's atmosphere, the dominant infrared absorbing gases are water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone (O₃). The same molecules are also the dominant infrared emitting molecules . . .

with respect...
the volume of emissions reduction if we shut it down completely...would not affect the temperature of the earth...
it would be infininitessimal.....

aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 11:30am

arsenault wrote:

curbing CO2 will have no affect on the planet's temperature..

This statement is demonstrably false (plus you mean "effect", not "affect").

See HERE

HIghlights/thumbnail version:

In the Earth's atmosphere, the dominant infrared absorbing gases are water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone (O₃). The same molecules are also the dominant infrared emitting molecules . . .

Thus, a table in the above wiki article indicates that if you removed all CO2 from the earth's atmosphere, the greenhouse effect (that is, the constant and ongoing absorption and reemission of solar radiation by atmospheric gases) would be reduced by 9%. As you can imagine, such a scenario will not ever happen, but the point is that various factors, including CO2 content in the atmosphere, have a measurable effect on climate and temperature for our planet.

While it is probably true that, as the article points out, "The amount of global warming caused by CO2 emissions can be modified by feedbacks and and climate tipping points" (i.e. other factors can potentially undo at least some warming caused by increased greenhouse effect from CO2), it's a fool's wager to count on such factors to guarantee that regardless of the levels of CO2 that are anthropogenically generated, earth's climate will remain unaffected.

arsenault

arsenault Avatar

Location: long beach cali USandA
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 10:51am

Zep wrote:

You missed "health-robbing" ....

Why Carbon Dioxide is a Pollutant.

The U.S. accounts for 4% of world population and 25% of the CO2 emissions.

CO2 is 0.03% of the atmosphere...
mans contribution is a tiny fraction of this...3.2% estimated..of the 0.03%
so if we curb it by 20% that would reduce CO2 by an infinitessimal amount..

curbing CO2 will have no affect on the planet's temperature..

witness...the planet has been cooling for 10 years..
and the planet has been warmer before...and cooler before..

concentrate on pollution..
or stop breathing out...its a scam...

Zep

Location: Funkytown

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 9:57am
arsenault wrote: spot the hysterical buzzwords... You missed "health-robbing" .... Why Carbon Dioxide is a Pollutant. The U.S. accounts for 4% of world population and 25% of the CO2 emissions.

aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 18, 2009 - 8:25am

arsenault wrote:

spot the hysterical buzzwords...

can we get off the crazy CO2 hate...
or just stop exhaling...or using electricity!
why not focus on pollutants...i would be on board..

man made CO2 is a drop in the bucket....
and not a pollutant..
whats next?

curb oxygen...?

it leads to spoilage...

anti oxidants rule!!

You know, right before the biblical flood, there was a guy who had the same message for Noah.
"Can't we get off the crazy H2O hate, Noah? What do you want us to do, stop bathing and drinking?

Why not just focus on water pollution, like dung? I'd be on board with that idea! Ark, my eye!!! What's next, a plague of locusts? Famine? Geez, you doomsayers are all alike!!"

{#Wink}

arsenault

arsenault Avatar

Location: long beach cali USandA
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 17, 2009 - 9:18pm

manbirdexperiment wrote:

Tell the EPA to Control CO2

Target: Joseph Lapka, EPA Scien Earthjusticetist
Sponsored by:

The EPA is ready to approve a monstrous, 1,500 megawatt
coal-fired power plant - without any CO₂ controls - on Navajo
land in New Mexico. The Desert Rock coal plant will inundate
native communities with health-robbing pollutants that cause
asthma and heart attacks and spew 12.7 million tons of CO₂greenhouse gases into the atmosphere every year.

Desert Rock is a centerpiece of Bush-era plans to spread coal
power across the land without regard for its environmental havoc.
But thanks to President Obama, the EPA now must listen to
what we have to say. This is the chance we all have been
waiting for - to be heard!

We only have until February 23 to speak up and help build a
groundswell movement in support of controlling this plant's
air pollution. Tell the EPA to impose the strictest-possible
CO₂ controls - making it the first plant in EPA history to
have such limits.

Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: La Villa Toscana
Gender: Male

Posted: Feb 17, 2009 - 11:16am

Tell the EPA to Control CO2

Target: Joseph Lapka, EPA Scientist
Sponsored by: Earthjustice

laozilover

laozilover Avatar

Location: K Town (Kenosha, Wisconsin)
Gender: Male

Posted: Nov 14, 2007 - 9:07pm

OlderThanDirt

OlderThanDirt Avatar

Location: In Transit
Gender: Male

Posted: Jul 10, 2007 - 3:53pm

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan

Posted: Jul 10, 2007 - 10:23am

Southern_Boy

Southern_Boy Avatar

Location: On my way to the beach
Gender: Male

Posted: Jul 10, 2007 - 10:21am

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan

Posted: Jul 10, 2007 - 10:17am

R_P

Gender:

Posted: May 4, 2006 - 9:14am

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next