Leafless

No your right, the glass in a greenhouse does not get thicker by itself unless of course you add additional panels of glass. But water vapor due to UV radiation increases and additional BTU's to existing water vapour increases temperature due to its own insulating effect by creating extra warm air volume in the upper atmosphere. This in turn increases the thickness of water vapour blanket around the earth with the end result being less heat dissipated during the evening hours adding further heat during the daylight hours. It is an apparent vicious cycle that will be next to impossible to stop especially with increases in population.

Yes..... in a land that remains the exact temperature 24 hours a day and is in a bubble protected from the general weather systems outside that bubble. Your being presumptuous. You mean you have never heard of a hot humid summer with little rain?

Increased temperatures in the upper atmosphere means an increased volume which translates to that expanded volume now has the capabilities to hold more water vapour. Therefore watering your lawn adds more water vapour which finds its home in that newly created space of higher temperatures. This in turn thickens that blanket of dense humid air which adds to the heating affect in the lower atmosphere adding to a further increase of natural evaporated water and worsening smog conditions.

Here is a pretty good link: Link Alternatively, a high school chemistry textbook should explain it. I already know what causes rain. Your link proves nothing as it does not necessarily have to rain UNLESS there is a pressure-temperature change. So in effect you could go weeks with very high humidity with no rain.

I said $550- Billion, sorry, it should have read from 1969 t0 2001, $700-Billion. http://www.languagefairness.ca/ You seem to think it is okay to impose French into the workings of our federal government and force Canada's majority English to learn this obsolete, non-commercial useless language without no type of controls to prevent domination of the federal government by users of a French minority language but suggest something wrong and discriminating when forcing Quebecois into learning English. WOW! Regardless, I never suggested force be applied to for Quebecois to learn English. But from what I can see, it has not done them much good to remain unilingual French in the province of Quebec as they are still reliant on excess federal services and huge equalization payments. In other words they don't have the capabilities of sustaining unilaterally their own French society, so why not freely assimilate with the ROC and be done with it? Why fight it? This is what some Quebecers have been doing for years anyways and is the primary reason so many of them are bilingual to-day.

Nah Leafless, I think your the one that has been mislead. The atmosphere can only hold a certain amount of water at a said temperature before it rains. Unlike CO2, you can't continuously increase the water vapour, as it would simply rain more... If the temperature of the Earth increased though, so would the water vapour stored in the warmer atmosphere. This post is also addressed to gc1765. Perhaps you can provide a link that proves what your saying, that is, when air is at 100% relative humidity it must rain. You can have constant high humidity levels with no rain. The point is that their are other factors responsible for the capability of air in the upper atmosphere to hold much more water vapour than previously. These factors are the depletion of the ozone layer allowing more UV radiation which in turn causes an increase in earth's temperature raising the temperature of oceans in turn affecting the trade wind temperatures causing unstable weather conditions around the globe. Compound this with the heavy air blanket of increased water vapour that surrounds the lower to upper atmosphere also is responsible for for further increase of evaporation due to higher temperatures adding even more H2O to the atmosphere and is responsible for the chaotic health conditions caused by trapped SMOG, due to this excessive layer of heavy water vapour caused by excess evaporation and man.

A person who speaks two languages but one is not French or English is not bilingual, they are an allophone. Only in Canada eh. That is a fact but limited to only Quebec and not all of Canada. In Quebec 'allophone' defies the definition of bilingual by allowing this word 'allophone' to override the official definiton of the word 'bilingual' in Quebec. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophone_(Quebec) But it is not unusual to see this type of linguistic oppression coming out of Quebec as their French language charter is also extremely oppressive, just as making Quebec unilaterally officially French speaking only, but then again they never did sign the Canadian constitution.

Canada for all practical purposes utilizes majority English as the only commercial language used across Canada, with the French language being artificially pursued by federal government at a very high cost. I quoted with one link being $60-billion dollars, but have seen the cost of the federal government pursuing and implementing bilingualism federally, with estimates as high as $550-Billion. It was also the federal government who implemented English and French on ALL Canadian packaging of products sold in Canada, with the end result increasing the cost of those products and having many products unavailable to Canadians due to the high cost of translation and associated legalities by private companies who wish or had proposed to sell their products in Canada. So please we are all not that naive to believe allowing the French to use their language comes at NO COST TO CANADIANS. The cost is extremely high but worse than that is the discriminatory, undemocratic aspect against English speaking Canadians, treating them as insignificant pertaining to the federal government and their bilingualism experiment, by excluding the input of English speaking Canadians concerning the validity of 'federal official bilingualism'.

I never heard of any federal mandate to make Canada 'officially bilingual' although it is something the feds are trying to promote but without much success as the French language for all practical purposes is obsolete making it a dysfunctional non commercial language, basically suitable for private use. Trudeau introduced official bilingualism in 1969 and since then it has become a cultural myth of Canada. Of course you are talking about 'official federal government bilingualism', which means all federal entities that are under federal control, i.e. parliament, federal public service, NCC, etc. This is not the same as declaring all of Canada as 'officially bilingual' as languages comes under provincial control not federal, but nevertheless the federal bilingualism policy is very discriminatory and undemocratic and expensive as Canadian tax payers pay for this discriminatory policy. http://www.writersblock.ca/spring2002/busword.htm

I would not go poking fun at a potential killer pandemic. http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/...063f4e40d1.html Looks like you also don't understand the mechanics of water vapour as a major polluter and could be primarily responsible for global warming.

I never heard of any federal mandate to make Canada 'officially bilingual' although it is something the feds are trying to promote but without much success as the French language for all practical purposes is obsolete making it a dysfunctional non commercial language, basically suitable for private use.

Ottawa is not. They have deemed some 3500 jobs as needed to be bilingual. Sorry guyser, any Canadian city that has a bilingual policy makes that city officially bilingual. But with the case of Ottawa, it is NOT recognized to date has being provincially officially bilingual so it does not have the full political clout it could have with it being designated as also provincially officially bilingual. The premier of Ontario is the only person that can authorize that status.

I have to laugh when Francophone's call Ottawa a bilingual city when adjacent Gatineau in Quebec just across the Ottawa River remains 'OFFICIALLY UNLINGUAL FRENCH', officially non-bilingual, no bilingual policy period. Ottawa is not provincially classified as an 'officially bilingual' city but it does have a generous, although like previously mentioned, a discriminatory and undemocratic bilingual policy. The percentage of people who speak French only in Ottawa is a very small, single digit percentage. http://www.languagefairness.org/French_Lan...ttawa__2001.php

I would have to question the superior intelligence bit, since it seems Francophone's and Quebec were never capable of supplying its own population with jobs created within Quebec, utilizing its superior language French. But I have to hand it to you, that was one one hell of a linguistic PR job Quebec pulled on the ROC. The English still can't figure it out!

Science is controlled by 'big business'. They don't want the public to be informed or have scientist investigate the reason for multinationals raking in trillions of dollars. Until of course it is blatantly obvious that the potential fortunes of multinationals are being threatened by the abusing the atmosphere.

"Almost 20% of city jobs will be designated officially bilingual by May and the cost of translation and training services is set to rise to almost $2 million a year. " http://www.ottawasun.com/News/OttawaAndReg...539826-sun.html -------------------------------------------------------------------- This is what happens as with the case of Ottawa, Ontario concerning a bilingual language policy which was unilaterally imposed on city residents without the involvement of tax paying Ottawa residents who were left out without a voice in the implementation of this DRACONIAN language policy that mirrors the discriminatory federal official language policy. This discriminatory language policy will result in the non-hiring of MAJORITY English only speaking candidates in their own MAJORITY ENGLISH SPEAKING CITY if they refuse to learn French. Ottawa's complete DRACONIAN language policy can be viewed at: http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/policies/bi...y/index_en.html It should be noted Ottawa's hospitals have the same DRACONIAN federally inspired language policy that serves to undermine the English majority population which results in francophone's being entitled to bilingual jobs that otherwise would be and SHOULD BE majority ENGLISH jobs. It should also be noted how harmful these undemocratically imposed language policies are without the voice of the tax paying public that pays for them, as it undermines all we have fought for in this country in the way of freedom and democracy.

So what did the scientists say? I believe they blamed global warming on population growth but neglected to say how. Here is some food for thought. The previous link clearly establishes that water vapour is the greenhouse gas that is basically responsible for greenhouse heating effect. But consider this. We are all familiar with how humans can add water vapour through simple chores like boiling water, even lawn watering where as a lot of that water evaporates and a thousand other ways. But the biggest offender is the automobile. For every single gallon of gasoline or 4.5 litres you burn, your vehicle produces the astounding amount of 8 pounds of water vapour per 1-gallon of gasoline. Now we know why, where we are today.

Read post #6 and the associated links.

There appears to be no answer to global warming. Humans only contribute a total of, 28% in greenhouse gasses that are thought to be responsible responsible for global warming. H20 is the major problem. Kyoto is barking up the wrong tree. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

This is the type of forced fed propaganda that would make any communist country PROUD. To bad Canadians were never given the opportunity to initially voice their approval or disapproval in a referendum, concerning constitutionalizing multiculturalism, bilingualism, official languages and everything else related to the undemocratic actions inspired by the Liberal party of Canada relating to Canada's constitution.

When the U.S. and Canada cleared their forest, consequences of pollution were relatively unknown. You are totally wrong and are immature to suggest it is okay for others to follow in the footsteps who already burnt their forest, as we know today, what the deadly consequences are to the planet. I bet your also not aware that the planet is overpopulated by 30%. Pollution increases with population. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation

I watched Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth the other day and I must admit - there was one piece of information that I did not know. We're always hearing about how the Oil and Gas industry are the main culprits but Gore clearly stated that 30% of all GHG come from the burning of forests - that would be South America and Africa. Yet I don't see this reflected in the per-capita emissions. As a matter of fact, the "notes" in the Wikipedia per-capita say that the US emmissions are based on Natural Gas. That would appear to mean that other countries are based on something else.....so I'm not sure how to interpret them on a comparative basis. But burning forests = 30% of all man-made GHG. Seems like a good place to start reducing. Wink-wink. Surely you must know developing countries are rated as Non-Annex- 1 economies and have NO GHG restrictions.

This is all the more reason majority English should be used throughout the country, as the only official 'commercial' language, including parliament. The way it is currently, Canadian society is providing the resources for minority francophone's to remain even more aloof than ever to cater to and keep alive their minority, obsolete language.

You can't have a referendum on every contentious issue. That's why we have MP's. I thought the reason for MP's was to represent the concerns of Canadians in parliament. Don't you think any issue of importance that in the end and winds up being constitutionilized, should be the buisness and responsibility of the citizens of Canada?

So...what you are saying is that the majority of Canadians are accepting of Gays and gay marriage. No. The legality of homosexuality or gay marriage was never determined by referendum, by Canadian citizens. So because of this, I prefer to remain biased against homosexuals and their lifestyles. Only if the majority of Canadians voted in favour of homosexuality would I be more likely to accept that type of behavior. This is what I feel the minimum requirement would be in order to form 'personal principles' in this particular instance.