Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That little video pretty much sums many of the global warmers. Well duh I read its warming, I read the sea ice is melting, I read the hurricanes are everywhere so it must be true!!
The Acid Rain scare has now been exposed as one of the largest scams in history. In 1980, the U.S. Federal Government launched the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), employing 700 hundred scientists at a cost of $500 million. The NAPAP study found that Acid Rain was non-threatening to the environment or humans. It was mainly a affected 2% of lake surface in the Adirondacks, which was made less acidic with cheap and quick liming. Human activity improving the environment? Imagine that.
Idiocy from somebody who doesn't live upstream from the US Eastern Seaboard. I grew up in Nova Scotia, downwind from the eastern half of North America. Don't believe in acid rain?
Come on over for a visit, where many rivers that used to have good salmon runs now have nothing because salmon are extremely vulnerable to lowered pH.
Come on over and see our stunted and dead pine and fur trees that line the roads.
Things have improved in recent years - slowly. And I credit this precisely to the EPA's efforts in the US to limit emissions of acid-rain forming compounds.
Ugh. So much ignorance. It amounts to "if I can't see it, it isn't happening!!!!11!!1!!1!!"
Global warming is real, humans having any effect on global warming is debatable. But my concern is with trying not to pollute our water, air, and food supply....the three things humans need to survive.
I have the same perspective. We will, and have, adapted to climate change which means some places will be too hot while others too cold will now be warmer. Even if we are not a cause, the climate will change. The air and water pollution is not debatable. Mercury, lead and PCBs are not debatable.
When you actually narrow the field down from asking cherrypicked "engineers" and anyone who claims to be a "geoscientist" to published scientists and and published climatologists the results are one sided.
Idiocy from somebody who doesn't live upstream from the US Eastern Seaboard. I grew up in Nova Scotia, downwind from the eastern half of North America. Don't believe in acid rain?
Come on over for a visit, where many rivers that used to have good salmon runs now have nothing because salmon are extremely vulnerable to lowered pH.
Come on over and see our stunted and dead pine and fur trees that line the roads.
Things have improved in recent years - slowly. And I credit this precisely to the EPA's efforts in the US to limit emissions of acid-rain forming compounds.
Ugh. So much ignorance. It amounts to "if I can't see it, it isn't happening!!!!11!!1!!1!!"
I agree it is complete idiocy from someone who has never lived in or around the appalachians. There are plenty of places could go from New England to North Carolina and see the effects of acid rain. There was a while where acid rain killed entire forests on Mount Mitchell.
Idiocy from somebody who doesn't live upstream from the US Eastern Seaboard. I grew up in Nova Scotia, downwind from the eastern half of North America. Don't believe in acid rain?
Come on over for a visit, where many rivers that used to have good salmon runs now have nothing because salmon are extremely vulnerable to lowered pH.
Come on over and see our stunted and dead pine and fur trees that line the roads.
Things have improved in recent years - slowly. And I credit this precisely to the EPA's efforts in the US to limit emissions of acid-rain forming compounds.
Ugh. So much ignorance. It amounts to "if I can't see it, it isn't happening!!!!11!!1!!1!!"
I streetviewed much of Nova Scotia with the recent imagery. So far, I call chicken little. Unlike OhioRules, I live on the eastern seaboard too, a couple states downwind from you. The salmon, trout, and bass are all fine here, as well as the forests of the Appalachians. Stop with the confirmation bias semantics
That is not true that they would not receive funding if they provided evidence that man-made climate change does not exist. Indeed, if a scientist was able to present strong data that that was the case, he or she would become famous over -night. Science builds step-by-step. When so much evidence, whether drawn from ocean temperature, or shrinking of the ice-caps, all indicate the same thing, it becomes foolhardy to ignore it.
Of course the U.S. is famous for its ignorance. What can you say about a country in which something like 40 % of the populace don't accept the evidence of evolution? (the highest rate in the world other than Turkey).
Yep, for me it is like flipping a nickel 100 times and having it come up heads 97 times and tails 3 times. I tend to go with the weight of evidence. Viewed objectively, it is highly unlikely that that is not a loaded nickel. The conservative partisans, in contrast, take those three tails findings and copy and paste them all over the internet. When you have no interest in the truth, it is easy to find what you want to find.
When you actually narrow the field down from asking cherrypicked "engineers" and anyone who claims to be a "geoscientist" to published scientists and and published climatologists the results are one sided.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
