Trump on Pollution

[LMP]

Are you against deforestation at least then? Since u seem to know something about photosynthesis

Trump Isn't he is ready to get rid of national park land. It's just sitting there doing nothing but being all parkish and stuff he can make America great again by giving it to corporations.

 

[waiguoren]

Are you against deforestation at least then? Since u seem to know something about photosynthesis

Are you capitulating on the topic of the so-called "97% consensus"?

A total ban on deforestation means no future paper production, no production of wood furniture, more expensive houses, no new wooden musical instruments or children's toys.

Clearly, a balance must be struck.

 

[usmctanker242]

Scott Pruitt denied it, even when the EPA's own data said that upwind pollution is a problem. I did not know Scott Pruitt was also head of the EPA under Obama.

Trumps current rate of rolling back environmental regulations, I am looking forward to catching this fish.

So why didn't the EPA under Obama act with this information? Why did they sit on it for 3+ years if it was such a big issue? Like always it wasn't an issue until Trump took over, and then magically now it's an issue. If anything this shows that Obama's administration wasn't capable of producing results. The EPA modeling data showed in Oct of 2016 that supposedly these other states were giving NY a tough deal with air quality... so why didn't the EPA act then, or during all that time? Kind of obvious isn't it considering that Pruitt didn't take over until Feb of 2017.

 

[The Best JG]

Trump Isn't he is ready to get rid of national park land. It's just sitting there doing nothing but being all parkish and stuff he can make America great again by giving it to corporations.

I really dont know his position on that stuff, sad if true though. I guess he wants to cut down his trees before other nations have a chance to cut down theirs so someone else will need to continue producing oxygen for the planet while he makes more money :/

 

[waiguoren]

I really dont know his position on that stuff, sad if true though. I guess he wants to cut down his trees before other nations have a chance to cut down theirs so someone else will need to continue producing oxygen for the planet while he makes more money :/

There were 59 national parks when Trump took office nearly a year ago. How many are there today?

 

[Bargey]

Uh.. ok do you think god created the earth in a few days and is watching and judging us? I guess it would be good to know what im dealing with here, since u dont seem to respect science

Yep, just play ignorant with the realities of things like economics and energy efficiency.

You’re a leftist. Why deal with reality when you can deal with fantasy and pretend that Germany didn’t waste $100 bil on solar power?

 

[Bargey]

Lol, you really are rustled, thinking agreement is cheerleading.

So rustled! Lol

 

[hillelslovak87]

So rustled! Lol

 

[The Best JG]

Are you capitulating on the topic of the so-called "97% consensus"?

None of them show that 97% of scientists believe that man is responsible for most of the earth's observed warming.

No, but i didnt want to continue cause i realized u didnt even understand what i was saying. Never at a single point have i said “most” of earths observed warming. I have simply been trying to argue the point that mans pollution can and does have an affect on the climate. If we were already able to out pollute a large volcanic eruption we would be extinct already (volcanic eruptions have caused mass extinctions in the past by the way), however we need to stop heading down that path of pollution before it gets more out of hand.

Its in no ones interest to spend countless generations recovering from a catastrophic environmental event such as the global ocean conveyor belt halting due to changes in ocean salinity. If all the plankton dies, where do we get our oyxgen from? Do you want humanity to suffocate?

 

[The Best JG]

Yep, just play ignorant with the realities of things like economics and energy efficiency.

You’re a leftist. Why deal with reality when you can deal with fantasy and pretend that Germany didn’t waste $100 bil on solar power?

Calling solar power a waste of money is one of the most idiotic things u can say. U realize money is a human construct right? We are talking about the health of the one planet we can live on currently; what is with the rights constant obsession with money? The health of the planet transcends “money”

 

[The Best JG]

There were 59 national parks when Trump took office nearly a year ago. How many are there today?

I dunno but i would be more concerned with actual total surface area of parks. If he increased it, good for everyone! I love a nice nature hike.

 

[usmctanker242]

Calling solar power a waste of money is one of the most idiotic things u can say. U realize money is a human construct right? We are talking about the health of the one planet we can live on currently; what is with the rights constant obsession with money? The health of the planet transcends “money”

To be fair the left is also obsessed with money and doing everything in their power to steal it from the rich. ; )

Solar power isn't exactly what it's advertised to be and likely it never will be. While it's a "feel good" source of minimal energy right now the problem becomes what to do with the waste... solar panels go bad, decay, and need to be handled in a similar manner as nuclear waste. So there's a cost associated with dealing with that and it's certainly something which needs to be addressed simply because who is going to pay for it? Germany is already running into this issue and it's costing citizens roughly 50% more this year, than last, for their energy bills due to the "solar surchage." While not generally crippling imagine doubling your power bill next year simply.
http://fortune.com/2017/03/14/germany-renewable-clean-energy-solar/

If the health of the planet was truly the goal of either side then nuclear power is where we should be looking. We'd have solved many of our power issues 30+ years ago with nuclear energy if it weren't for the naive Green Peace campaign. Green Peace utilized media and disinformation strategies to help squash nuclear power, and funny enough they were 100% wrong, and had to eat crow just a few years ago.
http://ecosense.me/2017/01/18/issues-20/

Just like solar, nuclear isn't ideal for all locations... I forget the exact number but I think it's roughly 80% of the Earth's power could reliably and safely come from nuclear power.

 

[MicroBrew]

As Americans we should have only the best Pollution, the most beautiful Pollution. Trump will make this happen. Why should China and India beat us at pollution.

 

[waiguoren]

No, but i didnt want to continue cause i realized u didnt even understand what i was saying. Never at a single point have i said “most” of earths observed warming. I have simply been trying to argue the point that mans pollution can and does have an affect on the climate.

No shit, nobody including the "skeptics" (Dyson, Lindzen, Christy, Spencer, Giaever) disputes that the greenhouse effect is real and that man's emissions have some warming influence. The question in science is always: how much? The main contention of the alarmists in the media (people like Bill Nye) and even some who publish in the field (Schmidt, Hansen, Dessler) is that man is responsible for most of the observed surface warming since the industrial revolution.

Also, you should tighten up your language. Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas that man is releasing into the atmosphere, but it is not a pollutant.

Its in no ones interest to spend countless generations recovering from a catastrophic environmental event such as the global ocean conveyor belt halting due to changes in ocean salinity. If all the plankton dies, where do we get our oyxgen from? Do you want humanity to suffocate?

This is pseudoscience.

The thermohaline circulation is not at risk of shutting down. Here's a NASA press release for you from 2010:

PASADENA, Calif. – New NASA measurements of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, part of the global ocean conveyor belt that helps regulate climate around the North Atlantic, show no significant slowing over the past 15 years. The data suggest the circulation may have even sped up slightly in the recent past.

The findings are the result of a new monitoring technique, developed by oceanographer Josh Willis of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., using measurements from ocean-observing satellites and profiling floats. The findings are reported in the March 25 issue of Geophysical Research Letters.

The Atlantic overturning circulation is a system of currents, including the Gulf Stream, that bring warm surface waters from the tropics northward into the North Atlantic. There, in the seas surrounding Greenland, the water cools, sinks to great depths and changes direction. What was once warm surface water heading north turns into cold deep water going south. This overturning is one part of the vast conveyor belt of ocean currents that move heat around the globe.

Without the heat carried by this circulation system, the climate around the North Atlantic -- in Europe, North America and North Africa -- would likely be much colder. Scientists hypothesize that rapid cooling 12,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age was triggered when freshwater from melting glaciers altered the ocean's salinity and slowed the overturning rate. That reduced the amount of heat carried northward as a result.

Until recently, the only direct measurements of the circulation's strength have been from ship-based surveys and a set of moorings anchored to the ocean floor in the mid-latitudes. Willis' new technique is based on data from NASA satellite altimeters, which measure changes in the height of the sea surface, as well as data from Argo profiling floats. The international Argo array, supported in part by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, includes approximately 3,000 robotic floats that measure temperature, salinity and velocity across the world's ocean.

With this new technique, Willis was able to calculate changes in the northward-flowing part of the circulation at about 41 degrees latitude, roughly between New York and northern Portugal. Combining satellite and float measurements, he found no change in the strength of the circulation overturning from 2002 to 2009. Looking further back with satellite altimeter data alone before the float data were available, Willis found evidence that the circulation had sped up about 20 percent from 1993 to 2009. This is the longest direct record of variability in the Atlantic overturning to date and the only one at high latitudes.

The latest climate models predict the overturning circulation will slow down as greenhouse gases warm the planet and melting ice adds freshwater to the ocean. "Warm, freshwater is lighter and sinks less readily than cold, salty water," Willis explained.

For now, however, there are no signs of a slowdown in the circulation. "The changes we're seeing in overturning strength are probably part of a natural cycle," said Willis. "The slight increase in overturning since 1993 coincides with a decades-long natural pattern of Atlantic heating and cooling."

If or when the overturning circulation slows, the results are unlikely to be dramatic. "No one is predicting another ice age as a result of changes in the Atlantic overturning," said Willis. "Even if the overturning was the Godzilla of climate 12,000 years ago, the climate was much colder then. Models of today's warmer conditions suggest that a slowdown would have a much smaller impact now.

"But the Atlantic overturning circulation is still an important player in today's climate," Willis added. "Some have suggested cyclic changes in the overturning may be warming and cooling the whole North Atlantic over the course of several decades and affecting rainfall patterns across the United States and Africa, and even the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic."

With their ability to observe the Atlantic overturning at high latitudes, Willis said, satellite altimeters and the Argo array are an important complement to the mooring and ship-based measurements currently being used to monitor the overturning at lower latitudes. "Nobody imagined that this large-scale circulation could be captured by these global observing systems," said Willis. "Their amazing precision allows us to detect subtle changes in the ocean that could have big impacts on climate."

For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit: http://www.nasa.gov .

JPL is managed for NASA by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.

 

[The Best JG]

To be fair the left is also obsessed with money and doing everything in their power to steal it from the rich. ; )

Solar power isn't exactly what it's advertised to be and likely it never will be. While it's a "feel good" source of minimal energy right now the problem becomes what to do with the waste... solar panels go bad, decay, and need to be handled in a similar manner as nuclear waste. So there's a cost associated with dealing with that and it's certainly something which needs to be addressed simply because who is going to pay for it? Germany is already running into this issue and it's costing citizens roughly 50% more this year, than last, for their energy bills due to the "solar surchage." While not generally crippling imagine doubling your power bill next year simply.
http://fortune.com/2017/03/14/germany-renewable-clean-energy-solar/

If the health of the planet was truly the goal of either side then nuclear power is where we should be looking. We'd have solved many of our power issues 30+ years ago with nuclear energy if it weren't for the naive Green Peace campaign. Green Peace utilized media and disinformation strategies to help squash nuclear power, and funny enough they were 100% wrong, and had to eat crow just a few years ago.
http://ecosense.me/2017/01/18/issues-20/

Just like solar, nuclear isn't ideal for all locations... I forget the exact number but I think it's roughly 80% of the Earth's power could reliably and safely come from nuclear power.

Solar power is nuclear power, but i prefer to leave the harmful exhaust radiation at the sun instead of on our planet. We just need better solar technology at this point, and to have a nice system in space that isnt affected by our weather.

The sun is literally all we need for energy, we just need to stop dicking around and advance the technology to capture it. This has been known for a long time. We are slowly getting there though.

 

[The Best JG]

No shit, nobody including the "skeptics" (Dyson, Lindzen, Christy, Spencer, Giaever) disputes that the greenhouse effect is real and that man's emissions have some warming influence. The question in science is always: how much? The main contention of the alarmists in the media (people like Bill Nye) and even some who publish in the field (Schmidt, Hansen, Dessler) is that man is responsible for most of the observed surface warming since the industrial revolution.

Also, you should tighten up your language. Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas that man is releasing into the atmosphere, but it is not a pollutant.



This is pseudoscience.

The thermohaline circulation is not at risk of shutting down. Here's a NASA press release for you from 2010:

PASADENA, Calif. – New NASA measurements of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, part of the global ocean conveyor belt that helps regulate climate around the North Atlantic, show no significant slowing over the past 15 years. The data suggest the circulation may have even sped up slightly in the recent past.

The findings are the result of a new monitoring technique, developed by oceanographer Josh Willis of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., using measurements from ocean-observing satellites and profiling floats. The findings are reported in the March 25 issue of Geophysical Research Letters.

The Atlantic overturning circulation is a system of currents, including the Gulf Stream, that bring warm surface waters from the tropics northward into the North Atlantic. There, in the seas surrounding Greenland, the water cools, sinks to great depths and changes direction. What was once warm surface water heading north turns into cold deep water going south. This overturning is one part of the vast conveyor belt of ocean currents that move heat around the globe.

Without the heat carried by this circulation system, the climate around the North Atlantic -- in Europe, North America and North Africa -- would likely be much colder. Scientists hypothesize that rapid cooling 12,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age was triggered when freshwater from melting glaciers altered the ocean's salinity and slowed the overturning rate. That reduced the amount of heat carried northward as a result.

Until recently, the only direct measurements of the circulation's strength have been from ship-based surveys and a set of moorings anchored to the ocean floor in the mid-latitudes. Willis' new technique is based on data from NASA satellite altimeters, which measure changes in the height of the sea surface, as well as data from Argo profiling floats. The international Argo array, supported in part by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, includes approximately 3,000 robotic floats that measure temperature, salinity and velocity across the world's ocean.

With this new technique, Willis was able to calculate changes in the northward-flowing part of the circulation at about 41 degrees latitude, roughly between New York and northern Portugal. Combining satellite and float measurements, he found no change in the strength of the circulation overturning from 2002 to 2009. Looking further back with satellite altimeter data alone before the float data were available, Willis found evidence that the circulation had sped up about 20 percent from 1993 to 2009. This is the longest direct record of variability in the Atlantic overturning to date and the only one at high latitudes.

The latest climate models predict the overturning circulation will slow down as greenhouse gases warm the planet and melting ice adds freshwater to the ocean. "Warm, freshwater is lighter and sinks less readily than cold, salty water," Willis explained.

For now, however, there are no signs of a slowdown in the circulation. "The changes we're seeing in overturning strength are probably part of a natural cycle," said Willis. "The slight increase in overturning since 1993 coincides with a decades-long natural pattern of Atlantic heating and cooling."

If or when the overturning circulation slows, the results are unlikely to be dramatic. "No one is predicting another ice age as a result of changes in the Atlantic overturning," said Willis. "Even if the overturning was the Godzilla of climate 12,000 years ago, the climate was much colder then. Models of today's warmer conditions suggest that a slowdown would have a much smaller impact now.

"But the Atlantic overturning circulation is still an important player in today's climate," Willis added. "Some have suggested cyclic changes in the overturning may be warming and cooling the whole North Atlantic over the course of several decades and affecting rainfall patterns across the United States and Africa, and even the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic."

With their ability to observe the Atlantic overturning at high latitudes, Willis said, satellite altimeters and the Argo array are an important complement to the mooring and ship-based measurements currently being used to monitor the overturning at lower latitudes. "Nobody imagined that this large-scale circulation could be captured by these global observing systems," said Willis. "Their amazing precision allows us to detect subtle changes in the ocean that could have big impacts on climate."

For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit: http://www.nasa.gov .

JPL is managed for NASA by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.

Well since we dont have any experience with the belt shutting down, its naive to say that no matter what we do it will not be affected. Quite a worrisome approach since our plankton dying would potentially cause extinction. When u fuck up on that scale, u dont get to just declare bankruptcy and start over like trump did several times

 

[LMP]

I really dont know his position on that stuff, sad if true though. I guess he wants to cut down his trees before other nations have a chance to cut down theirs so someone else will need to continue producing oxygen for the planet while he makes more money :/

Let's start with the good. Trump donated part of he presidential salary to the federal park service. Good right after he cut the department of the interior by 1.5 billion. We also now have over 1 million acres less national park land. Meh whatever he loves our national parks.

 

[usmctanker242]

Solar power is nuclear power, but i prefer to leave the harmful exhaust radiation at the sun instead of on our planet. We just need better solar technology at this point, and to have a nice system in space that isnt affected by our weather.

The sun is literally all we need for energy, we just need to stop dicking around and advance the technology to capture it. This has been known for a long time. We are slowly getting there though.

There comes a point in physics where technology can no longer "make magic." I'm not an engineer but I do hold a degree in Materials Engineering and I will tell you that solar power, as a technology, is reaching it's upper limit of feasibility. We are bound by Thermodynamics and there's only so much further we will be able to take solar power. The problem is people think solar power is some kind of unlimited and untapped source of infinite energy... this is not true.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/128_2015_637

Nuclear power, on the other hand, is only marginally utilized in terms of its potential and with another 20 years or so the safety of nuclear power will be exponentially greater than it is today. One of my favorite courses was a course of the materials side of nuclear engineering and one of the big takeaways was that we are very close to making nuclear energy very safe, accessible, and affordable. Remember, we just came out of a 30+ year hiatus of nuclear research because of the political connotations associated with nuclear energy.

 

[usmctanker242]

Let's start with the good. Trump donated part of he presidential salary to the federal park service. Good right after he cut the department of the interior by 1.5 billion. We also now have over 1 million acres less national park land. Meh whatever he loves our national parks.

I mean, lets be real, that park in Utah was only a park for about a year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bears_Ears_National_Monument

"Bears Ears National Monument is a United States National Monument located in San Juan County in southeastern Utah, established by President Barack Obama by presidential proclamation on December 28, 2016."

Be honest... did you give a shit about this land before Obama made it a national park last year? Did you even know about it? We also need to remember that the Utah governor is the one who asked for the reduction.
"In February 2017, Utah Governor Herbert signed a resolution passed by the Utah legislature asking President Donald Trump to rescind the designation of Bears Ears as a National Monument."

 

[LMP]

I mean, lets be real, that park in Utah was only a park for about a year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bears_Ears_National_Monument

"Bears Ears National Monument is a United States National Monument located in San Juan County in southeastern Utah, established by President Barack Obama by presidential proclamation on December 28, 2016."

Be honest... did you give a shit about this land before Obama made it a national park last year? Did you even know about it? We also need to remember that the Utah governor is the one who asked for the reduction.
"In February 2017, Utah Governor Herbert signed a resolution passed by the Utah legislature asking President Donald Trump to rescind the designation of Bears Ears as a National Monument."

I might say ok but it was part of his campaign to help boost the economy.