bush_cheney2004 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 So why don't you drink a little, couldn't hurt, it's natural. No problem....many products are made from crude oil. No modern living without it. It's the gift that keeps on giving. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 And can you confirm she will do that forever? No you can't. We will be the author of our own demise. Then nature will carry on in some othr form I'm sure, except in a way that won't support humans. Nope...the earth cares not about your dire predictions. Humans have survived far worse. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 No problem....many products are made from crude oil. No modern living without it. It's the gift that keeps on giving. If we geared up to capture one tenth of one percent of the energy the sun sends us each day, we wouldn't need oil. Sorry but your comment indicated your lack of scientific knowledge. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 Nope...the earth cares not about your dire predictions. Humans have survived far worse. Far worse than what? Care to clarify these shoot from the hip statements? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 Far worse than what? Care to clarify these shoot from the hip statements? Sure...Humans have survived earthquakes, ice ages, floods, epidemics, meteor strikes, carnivores, wild fires, and Justin Bieber. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 Sure...Humans have survived earthquakes, ice ages, floods, epidemics, meteor strikes, carnivores, wild fires, and Justin Bieber. Yes they have. All localized issues. Global warming is, wait for it, global. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 Yes they have. All localized issues. Global warming is, wait for it, global. So is "global cooling"....see "Ice Ages"...as in plural. Canada will be covered in ice...enjoy. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 So is "global cooling"....see "Ice Ages"...as in plural. Canada will be covered in ice...enjoy. We can deal with ice. We can't deal with air that is unbreathable. Quote
TimG Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 We can deal with ice. We can't deal with air that is unbreathable.WTF? What does CO2 have to do with breathability? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 WTF? What does CO2 have to do with breathability? Apparently you've never spent any time in Manilla, Port au Prince, Mexico City, Mumbai, Hong Kong, etc... Quote
TimG Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 (edited) Apparently you've never spent any time in Manilla, Port au Prince, Mexico City, Mumbai, Hong Kong, etc...This is what I hate about alarmists. They lecture people about the "science" when they can barely spell the word never mind understand what it means. CO2 is an orderless gas that is necessary for plants. The current average concentration is 400ppm but humans regularly live in indoor environments with a concentration over 1000ppm. It takes close to 10000ppm before humans notice any effect. CO2 has nothing to do with air breath-ability. Edited March 12, 2014 by TimG Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 This is what I hate about alarmists. They lecture people about the "science" when they can barely spell the word never mind understand what it means. CO2 is an orderless gas that is necessary for plants. The current average concentration is 400ppm but humans regularly live in indoor environments with a concentration over 1000ppm. It takes close to 10000ppm before humans notice any effect. CO2 has nothing to do with air breath-ability. CO2 holds heat in the same way a tent hods heat. And I suggest you research your numbers again. Quote
TimG Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 CO2 holds heat in the same way a tent hods heat. And I suggest you research your numbers again.I suggest you stop talking about things you know absolutely nothing about. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 I suggest you study a little of the IPCC report. You don't have to agree, but your relative numbers will be a tad more accurate. Quote
TimG Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 (edited) I suggest you study a little of the IPCC report.I have read a few chapters it but I suspect you have not. You throw it out because you want to sound like you know what you are talking about when you really know nothing. If you want to demonstrate that you actually know something then find a quote from the IPCC report which supports your ridiculous claim that CO2 is connected to air breath-ability. My prediction: you will respond with another zero information post. Edited March 12, 2014 by TimG Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 I have read a few chapters it but I suspect you have not. You throw it out because you want to sound like you know what you are talking about when you really know nothing. If you want to demonstrate that you actually know something then find a quote from the IPCC report which supports your ridiculous claim that CO2 is connected to air breath-ability. My prediction: you will respond with another zero information post. Obviously you have not been to the places I have mentioned. The exhaust makes your eyes and nose run, are you telling me that's OK? That's not CO2, it's other nocious gases. CO3 above 600 ppm can cause discomfort is humans. Once again, it's not the breathability that is the problem with CO2, it's the non release of heat that messes up such things as agriculture by altering weather. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Posted June 4, 2014 Just out today: Hundreds of scientists (from Canada and around the world) have signed a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper that says the recent report on the Northern Gateway pipeline is so flawed, it's essentially useless. Their argument is that it is based on flawed analysis of the risks and benefits to B.C.'s environment and society. What is the harm in delaying this decision so a more thorough analysis can be done. Once the province of BC signs on to this pipeline, there is no turning back. Let's get this right and postpone the decision. Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
cybercoma Posted June 4, 2014 Report Posted June 4, 2014 Harper doesn't care what a bunch of Ivory Tower scientists think. He'll do what the Ivory Tower oil execs tell him to do. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Posted June 4, 2014 Harper doesn't care what a bunch of Ivory Tower scientists think. He'll do what the Ivory Tower oil execs tell him to do. Indeed he will. Unfortunately, once it's approved and BC has to provide the access to the asian markers, we are doomed. There will inevitably be an oil spill sooner or later and our tourist industry will suffer for it. Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
TimG Posted June 4, 2014 Report Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) Indeed he will. Unfortunately, once it's approved and BC has to provide the access to the asian markers, we are doomed. There will inevitably be an oil spill sooner or later and our tourist industry will suffer for it.We cannot live in a world free of risk and trying to create one free of risk is largely an exercise in hypocrisy because everyone accepts risk when they believe the benefits are enough. When it comes to oil tankers you are correct that there will be minor spills and they will be cleaned up and it is unlikely that there will ever be any lasting effect and I am sure the doom mongers in media will go ballistic but that won't make the event any more significant. There is always a small chance of a major spill but the job of the regulators is to design multiple layers of protection to ensure that never happens. The bigger issue is one of fairness. BC has a moral obligation to allow Alberta to ship crude just like a person with property that happens to sit between the only road and neighbor's lot has a moral obligation to allow his neighbor to access to the road. If Gateway is too risky then there is always the southern route. Saying no is to all pipelines is not a reasonable option. Edited June 4, 2014 by TimG Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 4, 2014 Report Posted June 4, 2014 We cannot live in a world free of risk and trying to create one free of risk is largely an exercise in hypocrisy because everyone accepts risk when they believe the benefits are enough. When it comes to oil tankers you are correct that there will be minor spills and they will be cleaned up and it is unlikely that there will ever be any lasting effect and I am sure the doom mongers in media will go ballistic but that won't make the event any more significant. There is always a small chance of a major spill but the job of the regulators is to design multiple layers of protection to ensure that never happens. The bigger issue is one of fairness. BC has a moral obligation to allow Alberta to ship crude just like a person with property that happens to sit between the only road and neighbor's lot has a moral obligation to allow his neighbor to access to the road. If Gateway is too risky then there is always the southern route. Saying no is to all pipelines is not a reasonable option. They still are cleaning up the Exxon Valdez. Give your head a shake. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Posted June 4, 2014 When it comes to oil tankers you are correct that there will be minor spills and they will be cleaned up and it is unlikely that there will ever be any lasting effect How do you know there will only be minor spills? British Columbians do not want to take that risk. The economic loss would be catastrophic to our tourist industry. Our reputation is as a 'natural bc'. That is our slogan and it is why we have a very healthy tourist industry. If we start allowing tankers transporting oil to the 'asian' markets, we will lose our reputation. Why should we accommodate Alberta? Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
TimG Posted June 4, 2014 Report Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) How do you know there will only be minor spills?Stats. Minor spills occur, are cleaned up and no one notices. Once in a while a major spill occurs. The challenge is to reduce this risk to near zero with a layered approach to safety. It is more than doable given the technology available today. The economic loss would be catastrophic to our tourist industry.Gross exaggerations do not help your case. The chances of a "catastrophic" spill occurring are next to zero. That is our slogan and it is why we have a very healthy tourist industry. If we start allowing tankers transporting oil to the 'asian' markets, we will lose our reputation.Complete and total BS. No one outside of BC would notice or care. Also, BC has no authority to block tankers because allowing transport of goods is one of the obligations of confederation. This is a legal as well as moral obligation. How do think BC would do if Alberta started blocking all rail and truck traffic at the BC border? Edited June 4, 2014 by TimG Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Posted June 4, 2014 Stats. Minor spills occur, are cleaned up and no one notices. Once in a while a major spill occurs. The challenge is to reduce this risk to near zero will a layered approach to safety. It is doable given the technology available today. Gross exaggerations do not help your case. The chances of a "catastrophic" spill occurring are next to zero. Complete and total BS. No one outside of BC would notice or care. Also, BC has no authority to block tankers because allowing transport of goods is one of obligations of confederation. This is a legal as well as moral obligation. How do think BC would do if Alberta started blocking all rail and truck traffic at the BC border? You have no stats to support the amount of minor spills given the increase in tankers in our waterways. Catastrophic spills are quite real and very possible. But you are right, no one outside of BC would notice or care. Why do you think we need to stand up for our own province! Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
WestCoastRunner Posted June 4, 2014 Author Report Posted June 4, 2014 We cannot live in a world free of risk and trying to create one free of risk is largely an exercise in hypocrisy because everyone accepts risk when they believe the benefits are enough. Tim, You didn't really address the 300 scientists from all over the world regarding this report. What are your thoughts on this? You are quick to dismiss my concerns but what about these 300 scientists? Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.