• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

AGW and rising sea levels (1 Viewer)

litebeam

Well-known member
Understood, and accepted.


Do you agree there is a pollution problem, just not that AGW should be the driver for "doing something about it"?

In other words, you might be okay with laws that cut-down emissions but only because "pollution is bad for other reasons"?

In other words, you don't need AGW as an "excuse" to do other things to cut-down on pollution?

Pollution problem?
Yes, China, India, Russia, Indonesia..there are places that are a real concern.
Here in the U.S.? Not as bad, but in some areas, yes.
We've come a long way since the days of the endless belching smokestacks of Gary, IN, or Pittsburgh, PA. We no longer deal with messes like flammable rivers, but there is still work to be done.
Scrubber technology has been greatly improved for clean coal harvest, hopefully that will continue.
My real concern re: coal is for the miners themselves with black lung.
Clean burning diesel cars are amazing--economy and low emissions.

My wife and I have never needed 'an excuse' to be good stewards of our planet. And we're not alone.
Many of us are building our homes using renewable resources like cork and wool carpets, VOC-free paints and stains.


I'm personally more concerned with the effects and residue of Glyphosate (Roundup) in our foods, wildlife and water.
 
Last edited:

CalvinFold

Registered User
Supporter
Pollution problem?
Yes, China, India, Russia, Indonesia..there are places that are a real concern.
But not a concern under our control. I don't even allow arguments with my girlfriend to become "but, you're worse" because it's not excuse for either of us not to be better and call each other out on it.

Here in the U.S.? Not as bad, but in some areas, yes.
Does "not as bad" mean "rest on our laurels" or "we should be doing better"?

Or maybe more to the point: if the overall effect is a net gain year over year, is it good enough?


We've come a long way since the days of the endless belching smokestacks of Gary, IN, or Pittsburgh, PA. We no longer deal with messes like flammable rivers, but there is still work to be done.
Scrubber technology has been greatly improved for clean coal harvest, hopefully that will continue.
Do you find the current pace fast enough?

At what point do you think there may be some tipping point where we really screw the atmosphere up?


Clean burning diesel cars are amazing--economy and low emissions.
On paper...unless I missed something. Outside of the current crop of cars (since Volswagen and others have been found to be cheating)...are there actual examples this is true? (This is not rhetorical, I really want to know if I missed something.)

My wife and I have never needed 'an excuse' to be good stewards of our planet. And we're not alone.
And that is commendable, and good to know.

Many of us are building our homes using renewable resources like cork and wool carpets, VOC-free paints and stains.
It's good to know places exist in the USA where this kind of thing is affordable; gives me hope.

I'm personally more concerned with the effects and residue of Glyphosate (Roundup) in our foods, wildlife and water.
Among other things on the water and food supply that are creepy.
 
Last edited:

fugl

Well-known member
All I have ever cared about are the courts... On that front the effects of this administration will be very far reaching indeed.

Ah, yes, “pro-life” judges and religious “freedom”, that’s what you care most about and that’s where Dumbo has done you proud.
 

fugl

Well-known member
So similarly....yeah taxes and credits are just shifting the problem away to someone or somewhere else, but not an actual solution.

There is no politically feasible grand “solution” for AGW, just various mitigative measures, legislative and regulatory, of which tax and carbon credits are honorable examples. “Clean living” by individuals counts for nothing; the only way forward is political, electing environmentally-minded people to public office. I know from previous discussion, that you personally dislike politics as a messy business subject to corrupt influences of various kinds. Most of us do but the realistic among us know that it’s all we’ve got.

To my mind, to don the mantle of virtue as you and litebeam have done on the basis of how you conduct your personal lives while at the same time voting for Trump and his pollution agenda (or, in your case, throwing your vote away on an unelectable third party) is the height of hypocrisy and unearned self-esteemery.
 

CalvinFold

Registered User
Supporter
I know from previous discussion, that you personally dislike politics as a messy business subject to corrupt influences of various kinds. Most of us do but the realistic among us know that it’s all we’ve got.
And all we will ever have because...

To my mind, to don the mantle of virtue as you and litebeam have done on the basis of how you conduct your personal lives while at the same time voting for Trump and his pollution agenda (or, in your case, throwing your vote away on an unelectable third party) is the height of hypocrisy and unearned self-esteemery.
Lucky for you, people like me are few and far between. :)
 

litebeam

Well-known member
Ah, yes, “pro-life” judges and religious “freedom”, that’s what you care most about and that’s where Dumbo has done you proud.

Umm...no, Sherlock. Actually I want justices who will FOLLOW THE DAMN CONSTITUTION. That's where your President has done us proud.

That was hard, wasn't it?
 

fugl

Well-known member
Umm...no, Sherlock. Actually I want justices who will FOLLOW THE DAMN CONSTITUTION. That's where your President has done us proud.

So, you deny you're "pro-life" (a misnomer if there ever was one!) do you? I thought not. As your pastor will surely have informed you, telling lies in public places can have the most dreadful consequences in the hereafter..
 
Last edited:

fugl

Well-known member
And all we will ever have because...

. . .because I'm unable to think of an acceptable alternative at this stage. How about you? Any practical ideas? You know the kind I mean: ideas that could work in the world as it it not just in the world as you would like it to be.

Lucky for you, people like me are few and far between. :)

Not too few but altogether too many, I'm afraid; thus the horror in the White House and the ensuing all-out attack on the environment and climate science. Not entirely the fault of innocents such as yourself, of course, but they and you were most certainly contributory to that foul end.
 
Last edited:

litebeam

Well-known member
But not a concern under our control. I don't even allow arguments with my girlfriend to become "but, you're worse" because it's not excuse for either of us not to be better and call each other out on it.


At what point do you think there may be some tipping point where we really screw the atmosphere up?



On paper...unless I missed something. Outside of the current crop of cars (since Volswagen and others have been found to be cheating)...are there actual examples this is true? (This is not rhetorical, I really want to know if I missed something.)


And that is commendable, and good to know.


It's good to know places exist in the USA where this kind of thing is affordable; gives me hope.


Among other things on the water and food supply that are creepy.
Kevin, there is more work to do. Are we at a environmental crossroads? No, I don't believe so. I'll be skewered here for that, but oh well.

We were at a crossroads in the early 70's, thank God we acted. Prudent continued regulation is important to a point. The extent to which the EPA went in recent years was out of control. I won't further debate the nuances of that. I've opined here at length in the past.
Per your other questions, clean burning diesels extend beyond Volkswagen, and not all companies should be painted with their deceptive brush. Dodge markets a full size diesel 4x4 Ram truck that is quiet, gets 30 mpg(!) and emits very low airborne particulates. There are many others.

......
 
Last edited:

CalvinFold

Registered User
Supporter
litebeam,

Thanks for letting me politely learn your PoV on all this. It was interesting, and unexpected.

Thanks for your patience,
 

CalvinFold

Registered User
Supporter
. . .because I'm unable to think of an acceptable alternative at this stage. How about you? Any practical ideas? You know the kind I mean: ideas that could work in the world as it it not just in the world as you would like it to be.

Not too few but altogether too many, I'm afraid; thus the horror in the White House and the ensuing all-out attack on the environment and climate science. Not entirely the fault of innocents such as yourself, of course, but they and you were most certainly contributory to that foul end.
fugl, we simply don't agree on methodology on this topic...you assume I'm at fault, I assume people who vote like you do are. Beyond that, any ideas I have would always be at odds with your viewpoint. Discussion ends before it begins.
 

CalvinFold

Registered User
Supporter
fugl,

Any way to get the gist if these NYT stories outside the NYTI web site? They have a paywall and I exhaust their limited free stories a month pretty much the first day of the month.

Or maybe you can summarize?

I got a chance to skim the "midterm and global warming" article, but when I went back to really read it properly it was blocked.
 

fugl

Well-known member
fugl,

Any way to get the gist if these NYT stories outside the NYTI web site? They have a paywall and I exhaust their limited free stories a month pretty much the first day of the month.

Or maybe you can summarize?

I got a chance to skim the "midterm and global warming" article, but when I went back to really read it properly it was blocked.

Sorry, I know of no way to get around the paywall (I’m a subscriber so the question doesn’t arise in my case). You might want to check out the Observer as an alternative. It doesn’t have a paywall and its coverage of American news—including environmental and conservation news—is surprisingly thorough.
 
Last edited:

viator

Well-known member
Singapore
fugl,

Any way to get the gist if these NYT stories outside the NYTI web site? They have a paywall and I exhaust their limited free stories a month pretty much the first day of the month.

Calvin, if you use Chrome just open an incognito window and visit the NYT site from it. It'll stop NYT storing cookies on your machine where it stores the count of the stories you've read.

This is a generic way around paywalls - I've not used much recently on the NYT but use all the time on other sites.

Regards
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top