norcan
Well-Known Member
Not quite. That’s capitalism you’re thinking of, friend.
Will the looney left and free huggers be exposed in years to come?
- Thread starter gixer1
- Start date
Wrong, two sides of the same coin.
alberta boy
Well-Known Member
Funny , the older I get , the less difference I see between the extreme left and extreme right . They're both equally narrow minded , self destructive and intolerant of others opinions , samie same . That's probably why I despise politicians of all leanings .
AB
The supposed Chinese curse of 'May you live in interesting times' comes to mind...
Pine Marten
Well-Known Member
What is the Loony Left exactly? Apart from a catchy 1980s Sun headline? What tips it into "loony"? And when it comes to tree huggers, given how much effort we all put, or should do, into practical conservation, there should be common ground, no? Who here doesn't love trees and forests?
There is definitely a Rabid Right? Are they going to be proved wrong or admit to the error of their ways?
Or perhaps the point isn't to prove who was right or wrong, and to actually work together to solve problems. Because reality doesn't give a damn about where you sit on a notional political spectrum based on a parliamentary seating arrangement during the French revolution.
There is definitely a Rabid Right? Are they going to be proved wrong or admit to the error of their ways?
Or perhaps the point isn't to prove who was right or wrong, and to actually work together to solve problems. Because reality doesn't give a damn about where you sit on a notional political spectrum based on a parliamentary seating arrangement during the French revolution.
I love trees in the right place…mass planting to appease environmentalists that wipe out peat bogs and destroy heather moors on the other hand - no thanks. That’s pandering, not science.
Regards,
Gixer
Pine Marten
Well-Known Member
Then you want not only more trees, but better trees. And if some people want to hug them, they can. That's OK. We should be able to work with that, no?
Where? And by what definition are they either "right" or rabid? There are no right wing or even centre right mainstream political parties in the UK. Indeed, I've yet to hear what right wing actually means in practice. I've heard a few tired tropes but they are invariably examples of projection trotted out by people who would divert attention and accuse electoral opponents of the very things they are doing themselves.
Is a right-winger anyone who doesn't blindly accept your world-view and moral template without question?
And if "the right" represents moral degeneracy and heartlessness, who decides that? Who is arbiter of such rights and wrongs, on what authority and with whose mandate?
Saying they're awful and wicked and I'm superior and cleverer because I say so, without any analysis, smells just like what it is.
Maybe there is some parallel universe in which people may be neatly categorised and either patronised or despised according to whether they meet the criteria to join this playground gang or that one, it's not reflective of real life.
Last edited:
i think in years to come, what will be obvious is not that the climate is changing, but how we were diverted from tackling the change itself, let me give you an example, in every country on earth there are rivers, some large some small, and in most instances these rivers run into the sea, some form reservoirs and lakes, some are used to provide power, but inevitably the water will end up in the sea, along with sewerage, waste plastic, etc.................now no one ever mentions what damage all that water does to the climate , the coasts etc, we are constantly being warned about rising sea levels, due to climate change, and yet it is obvious that the level of the sea will rise, it has always been rising, it was rising sea levels that separated us from Europe and the first land mass that was on the earth from the beginning of time.(Pangaea) " It's lack of understanding of nature that will eventually do us in", unless we learn to control the water, divert it to where it's needed, etc, then flooding will happen, coasts will crumble, etc, same with forests, now forests are a good thing, but building houses in the middle of a forest creates a fire hazard, and eventually cause havoc, and we have seen this especially in the States, where large areas of forestation have been turned into luxury house plots. We obviously have to show care for the environment, but it is essential we do the right things, the things that matter, not the stupid things these environmental protesters are on about, in the UK a small island, we have done enough, and if other countries don't follow our lead there is no point us struggling to feed ourselves, or to heat our homes, we have for too long been lax on building for the future, not the ludicrous infrastructure that is in process, such as HS2, 3rd runways, etc, we should be building reservoirs, hydro-electric sites, we should be building houses that will last, and at a size that suit all the needs, We should make sure land drainage is sufficient and managed, there are lots of things we can do to manage the changes in the environment, but sometimes you get the opinion that Governments don't really care.
Eh..? Rivers won't make sea levels rise, even if they are full of sh*t and plastic. Rivers and seas are all the same body of water water revolving around the convection cycle.
Melted glaciers and ices caps will raise seas levels. As they have in the past and will again in the future.
Or am I misreading your post?
Melted glaciers and ices caps will raise seas levels. As they have in the past and will again in the future.
Or am I misreading your post?
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
have you got a link to this info? i cant find anything to back this up
Sinistral
Well-Known Member
The problem hasn't gone away by any means. Readings are usually published at year end, so this report is from 2021, in words I can understand:-
The hole in the ozone layer that develops annually is “rather larger than usual” and is currently bigger than Antartica, say the scientists responsible for monitoring it. Researchers from the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service say that this year’s hole is growing quickly and is larger than 75% of ozone holes at this stage in the season since 1979.
Ozone exists about seven to 25 miles (11-40km) above the Earth’s surface, in the stratosphere, and acts like a sunscreen for the planet, shielding it from ultraviolet radiation. Every year, a hole forms during the late winter of the southern hemisphere as the sun causes ozone-depleting reactions, which involve chemically active forms of chlorine and bromine derived from human-made compounds.
In a statement Copernicus said that this year’s hole “has evolved into a rather larger than usual one”.Vincent-Henri Peuch, the service’s director, said: “We cannot really say at this stage how the ozone hole will evolve. However, the hole of this year is remarkably similar to the one of 2020, which was among the deepest and the longest-lasting – it closed around Christmas – in our records since 1979.
“The 2021 ozone hole is now among the 25% largest in our records since 1979, but the process is still under way. We will keep monitoring its development in the next weeks. A large or small ozone hole in one year does not necessarily mean that the overall recovery process is not going ahead as expected, but it can signal that special attention needs to be paid and research can be directed to study the reasons behind a specific ozone hole event.”
Scientists accept that the depletion in the ozone layer is caused by human-made gases called CFCs, which were first developed in the 1930s for use in refrigeration systems and were then deployed as propellants in aerosol spray cans. The chemicals are stable so can travel from the Earth’s surface to the stratosphere. But then, at the altitude where stratospheric ozone is found, they are broken down by high-energy UV radiation. The ensuing chemical reactions destroy ozone. CFCs have been banned in 197 countries around the world.
Since the ban on so-called halocarbons the ozone layer has shown signs of recovery, but it is a slow process and it will take until the 2060s or 70s for a complete phasing-out of the depleting substances. During recent years with normal weather conditions, the ozone hole has typically grown to a maximum of 20 million sq km (8 million sq miles).
The 2020 Arctic ozone hole was also very large and deep, and peaked at roughly three times the size of the continental US.
The Antarctic ozone hole usually reaches its peak between mid-September and mid-October. When temperatures start to rise high up in the stratosphere in late southern hemisphere spring, ozone depletion slows, the polar vortex weakens and finally breaks down and, by December, ozone levels usually return to normal.
Well when the Ice caps and glaciers melt, they usually run into rivers and then to the sea, except icebergs etc, so its all about management, if we know that the sea level rises because of the excess water going into it, then surely we need to do something about it, like build reservoirs, and manage the flow better, also think of the silt that gets washed into the sea, obviously if there is less room for the water in the sea, then floods will occur, even as the coasts erode, the debris washed into the sea, causes less room for the water eventually the sea will overtake the land, like we build on flood plains, so we are diminishing the storage space for the water to be stored until evaporation occurs.
Scotty99
Well-Known Member
From a Canon printer manual.
”
Ozone from the Unit
Although ozone is generated from the machine during operation, it does not have any affect on the human body. However, if you intend to use the machine for long periods of time, ensure that the installation location is well ventilated for a comfortable working environment.”
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
doesnt link it to fixing the ozone layer though, seems a big leap to me
Green polices are about status quo, not saving the planet, the planet will continue long after mankind has gone, just like the dinosaurs who never drove V8s, but climate did for them. The fact is world population has out grown the planet and todays resources. I don,t need overpaid politicians and professional environmentalists flying around the world, telling me not to drive or fly.
Elon musk has the right idea, sell the stupid environmentalists electric cars while you launch rockets into space so they can burn more energy on there mobile communication devices telling us to save energy.
NZ is getting covered in new forestry, to catch carbon, not from Nz but to sell to other countries as carbon credits, so we can buy imports of food, to subsidies the food production lost from planting trees and a growing population needing homes.
The Chinese revolutionary party, realised that Chinas population, was out growing the country’s resources in the 70s -80s, although this had nothing to do with saving the planet but economics both go hand in hand.
Elon musk has the right idea, sell the stupid environmentalists electric cars while you launch rockets into space so they can burn more energy on there mobile communication devices telling us to save energy.
NZ is getting covered in new forestry, to catch carbon, not from Nz but to sell to other countries as carbon credits, so we can buy imports of food, to subsidies the food production lost from planting trees and a growing population needing homes.
The Chinese revolutionary party, realised that Chinas population, was out growing the country’s resources in the 70s -80s, although this had nothing to do with saving the planet but economics both go hand in hand.
