As long as we're going to cook the planet, can we at least add some industrial-production levels of barbecue sauce with which to add as a foot-deep layer of coating to it?
I'm so glad they didn't harm the environment by building dams, so that they could release so much carbon emissions when they ran out of water to fight fires. Alas, these things happen, and sometimes no amount of preparation can prevent some bad forest fires or severe drought. Still, thinking that doing things against your best interest will somehow prevent bad things from happening is stupid.
Still, thinking that doing things against your best interest will somehow prevent bad things from happening is stupid.
Good point. We should have never banned PCBs, DDT, asbestos, lead or mercury or any toxin! Think of how much richer their manufacturers could have been!
Hey, when someone's getting money from getting you killed or sick, why argue?
BTW Leland, can you change your life insurance policy beneficiary to my name, please? I would really appreciate you looking out for my best interest like that. Thanks -
Ritmo, why do you revel in such poor reading skills? Considering how bad they are, I'm sure this will be useless to you, but others will click it, understand it, and realize how shallow and ugly you are.
The 15 environmental health experts, who reviewed almost 500 health studies, concluded that DDT "should be used with caution, only when needed, and when no other effective, safe and affordable alternatives are locally available."
We cannot allow people to die from malaria, but we also cannot continue using DDT if we know about the health risks," said Tiaan de Jager, a member of the panel who is a professor at the School of Health Systems & Public Health at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. "Safer alternatives should be tested first and if successful, DDT should be phased out without putting people at risk."
The scientists reported that DDT may have a variety of human health effects, including reduced fertility, genital birth defects, breast cancer, diabetes and damage to developing brains. Its metabolite, DDE, can block male hormones.
"Based on recent studies, we conclude that humans are exposed to DDT and DDE, that indoor residual spraying can result in substantial exposure and that DDT may pose a risk for human populations," the scientists wrote in their consensus statement, published online today in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
"We are concerned about the health of children and adults given the persistence of DDT and its active metabolites in the environment and in the body, and we are particularly concerned about the potential effects of continued DDT use on future generations."
Ok. So one of your corporate taskmaster's chemicals (as dangerous or even potentially dangerous as it remains), still has a use, particularly in developing countries. How does that mitigate the argument that one of the many other rich man's poisons is good for us, just by his profiting off of it?
Ironically enough, you know why malaria is spreading, including into areas where it didn't use to exist? You guessed it! (Or maybe you didn't). It has to do with heat and climate.
These are always about trade-offs. You're just making the wrong ones. Or trade-offs for the wrong priorities on behalf of people who don't care about you. Or me.
You cannot pay off the malarial mosquitos to keep them from coming north. You cannot pay off bumblebees so as to make them more heat-resistant - no matter how many of our crops depend on them.
You cannot do these things.
You cannot pretend that economies make the world possible. The natural world, as it was created, as we adapted to it, is what made everything we do, including our economies, possible.
You are putting the cart before the horse. And all the religious guys out there are participating in the ruination of creation with this stuff.
I hear they increasingly disagree with it, though.
All those early 60's books - "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Silent Spring" are getting a critical second look.
Whatever that means.
Just come out and tell us which poisons you'd like us to lace our our breathable air and drinkable water with. Tell us the doses, exposure levels. Put it on the table instead of just giving this vague, pro-poison, corporatist stance. Tell us which poisons you'd like to use on us, and at what levels. Thanks -
Copy/paste does not suggest ability to read, which is why English teachers across the US flunk students who think otherwise. Nice Fail. The rest of your rambling is hysterical, which I used properly and you won't be able to understand that I did.
You're the one who wants to fight for another man's profiting off of poisoning you (which I don't care about) as well as their poisoning me and others (which I do care about). If that's not hysterical, who knows what is? And as such, no one cares if you want to deny all the harms listed in the article YOU linked to. I understand you can't come up with your own ideas or arguments. But you should at least read and attempt to understand the ones that you choose to link to.
Again, since you're too stupid to realize that everyone else sees what you're doing - mistaking a narrow economic argument (around one man's or one company's profit), with an argument on how the natural world works - it's not surprising that you'll deflect and flail feign misunderstanding for as long as it takes to stall. Keep stalling. Keep denying. It's what you denialists do. FIrst you deny the argument. Then you deny that you don't have a rebuttal. Deny. Deny. Deny. Blame and call names. Appeal to grade school practices when you fail life's expectations of you as a functioning adult member of society.
This is my neighborhood, the valley where I live. I can almost see my house from there :-)
This fire was a couple of years ago and was started by lightening strikes in a dry storm. The terrain that is burning is nearly impossible to get to by vehicles and much of it is basically lava beds and scrub. We have fires in this general area every single year and we have a few small ones today. There isn't that much left to burn for now. This is NORMAL.
One of the main reasons that this and one last year, in Hat Creek area, were so bad was due to the build up of underbrush in the forested area controlled by our omnipresent government bureaucrats. The areas which used to be select logged were forbidden from being logged again many years ago. The build up of dead, bug infested trees plus high levels of undergrowth cause the fires to be hotter and begin crowning. Had they let people take care of the wilderness area the fires would not have been as bad. There would still be fires, just not as bad.
This has nothing to do with so called Global Warming. It is a natural phenomenon caused by thunder storms and a cyclical drought that has occurred repeatedly in the west over Tends of thousands of years.
We had a drought similar to this in the 1970's and the Chicken Littles were all running around with their feathers afluff saying we are all going to die. It was also about this time that we were going to be going into the next ice age.....immediately!!! Geeze make up your minds! But...I digress. So a drought. No WATER OMG!!!! Then suddenly El Nino and in one winter the reservoirs were all full again.
People proposed that....perhaps....we might build some more water storage then to plan for future droughts. Of course, the enviro nazis put a kabosh on the that idea. You might harm a butterfly or something. So. No storage. No planning and then comes the inevitable CYCLICAL drought and suddenly it is 1970's all over again (thankfully without the dreadful clothing and hairstyles). Were all gonna die and dry up. Or....maybe not.
Either way. We can't stop the weather. All you can do is be prepared. Good luck trying to get some sensible water management passed this time. People never learn
Bastrop is starting to become well known nationally thanks to the ginned up stories about Jade Helm. The interesting thing about Bastrop is it suffered some of the worst flooding this year as evidenced by its local dam being crested a few days prior to Houston being flooded. Back in 2011, it was the location of one of the worse wildfires (certainly worse in property damage value) during the Texas drought. It is why I didn't declare that reasonable water management means no more wildfires. I'm glad you understand this too.
20 comments:
Yeay!!! Weenie roast time! Let's cook the planet!
Thanks to the delta smelt.
I didn't know it smelt like burning trees.
FIRE is new to the planet. Never had them until we discovered global warming.
Hurricanes are new too, same with earthquacks.
off to pedal my global warming bike up to the farmer's market.
As long as we're going to cook the planet, can we at least add some industrial-production levels of barbecue sauce with which to add as a foot-deep layer of coating to it?
Large fires have been burning for quite a while in Saskatchewan. The smoke was heavy at times where I live in West Central Wisconsin last week.
Probably Bush's fault.
I'm so glad they didn't harm the environment by building dams, so that they could release so much carbon emissions when they ran out of water to fight fires. Alas, these things happen, and sometimes no amount of preparation can prevent some bad forest fires or severe drought. Still, thinking that doing things against your best interest will somehow prevent bad things from happening is stupid.
Still, thinking that doing things against your best interest will somehow prevent bad things from happening is stupid.
Good point. We should have never banned PCBs, DDT, asbestos, lead or mercury or any toxin! Think of how much richer their manufacturers could have been!
Hey, when someone's getting money from getting you killed or sick, why argue?
BTW Leland, can you change your life insurance policy beneficiary to my name, please? I would really appreciate you looking out for my best interest like that. Thanks -
Ritmo, why do you revel in such poor reading skills? Considering how bad they are, I'm sure this will be useless to you, but others will click it, understand it, and realize how shallow and ugly you are.
Fires put potassium back into access able form. Smoke seeds rains which will follow.
All those early 60's books - "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Silent Spring" are getting a critical second look.
Not only can I read, I can quote!
The 15 environmental health experts, who reviewed almost 500 health studies, concluded that DDT "should be used with caution, only when needed, and when no other effective, safe and affordable alternatives are locally available."
We cannot allow people to die from malaria, but we also cannot continue using DDT if we know about the health risks," said Tiaan de Jager, a member of the panel who is a professor at the School of Health Systems & Public Health at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. "Safer alternatives should be tested first and if successful, DDT should be phased out without putting people at risk."
The scientists reported that DDT may have a variety of human health effects, including reduced fertility, genital birth defects, breast cancer, diabetes and damage to developing brains. Its metabolite, DDE, can block male hormones.
"Based on recent studies, we conclude that humans are exposed to DDT and DDE, that indoor residual spraying can result in substantial exposure and that DDT may pose a risk for human populations," the scientists wrote in their consensus statement, published online today in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
"We are concerned about the health of children and adults given the persistence of DDT and its active metabolites in the environment and in the body, and we are particularly concerned about the potential effects of continued DDT use on future generations."
Ok. So one of your corporate taskmaster's chemicals (as dangerous or even potentially dangerous as it remains), still has a use, particularly in developing countries. How does that mitigate the argument that one of the many other rich man's poisons is good for us, just by his profiting off of it?
Ironically enough, you know why malaria is spreading, including into areas where it didn't use to exist? You guessed it! (Or maybe you didn't). It has to do with heat and climate.
These are always about trade-offs. You're just making the wrong ones. Or trade-offs for the wrong priorities on behalf of people who don't care about you. Or me.
You cannot pay off the malarial mosquitos to keep them from coming north. You cannot pay off bumblebees so as to make them more heat-resistant - no matter how many of our crops depend on them.
You cannot do these things.
You cannot pretend that economies make the world possible. The natural world, as it was created, as we adapted to it, is what made everything we do, including our economies, possible.
You are putting the cart before the horse. And all the religious guys out there are participating in the ruination of creation with this stuff.
I hear they increasingly disagree with it, though.
All those early 60's books - "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Silent Spring" are getting a critical second look.
Whatever that means.
Just come out and tell us which poisons you'd like us to lace our our breathable air and drinkable water with. Tell us the doses, exposure levels. Put it on the table instead of just giving this vague, pro-poison, corporatist stance. Tell us which poisons you'd like to use on us, and at what levels. Thanks -
Copy/paste does not suggest ability to read, which is why English teachers across the US flunk students who think otherwise. Nice Fail. The rest of your rambling is hysterical, which I used properly and you won't be able to understand that I did.
Leland:
You're the one who wants to fight for another man's profiting off of poisoning you (which I don't care about) as well as their poisoning me and others (which I do care about). If that's not hysterical, who knows what is? And as such, no one cares if you want to deny all the harms listed in the article YOU linked to. I understand you can't come up with your own ideas or arguments. But you should at least read and attempt to understand the ones that you choose to link to.
Again, since you're too stupid to realize that everyone else sees what you're doing - mistaking a narrow economic argument (around one man's or one company's profit), with an argument on how the natural world works - it's not surprising that you'll deflect and flail feign misunderstanding for as long as it takes to stall. Keep stalling. Keep denying. It's what you denialists do. FIrst you deny the argument. Then you deny that you don't have a rebuttal. Deny. Deny. Deny. Blame and call names. Appeal to grade school practices when you fail life's expectations of you as a functioning adult member of society.
Then you deny that you don't have a rebuttal.
There is no denial. I don't rebut hysteria, because the hysterical are incapable of understanding, but I'm repeating myself.
This is my neighborhood, the valley where I live. I can almost see my house from there :-)
This fire was a couple of years ago and was started by lightening strikes in a dry storm. The terrain that is burning is nearly impossible to get to by vehicles and much of it is basically lava beds and scrub. We have fires in this general area every single year and we have a few small ones today. There isn't that much left to burn for now. This is NORMAL.
One of the main reasons that this and one last year, in Hat Creek area, were so bad was due to the build up of underbrush in the forested area controlled by our omnipresent government bureaucrats. The areas which used to be select logged were forbidden from being logged again many years ago. The build up of dead, bug infested trees plus high levels of undergrowth cause the fires to be hotter and begin crowning. Had they let people take care of the wilderness area the fires would not have been as bad. There would still be fires, just not as bad.
This has nothing to do with so called Global Warming. It is a natural phenomenon caused by thunder storms and a cyclical drought that has occurred repeatedly in the west over Tends of thousands of years.
We had a drought similar to this in the 1970's and the Chicken Littles were all running around with their feathers afluff saying we are all going to die. It was also about this time that we were going to be going into the next ice age.....immediately!!! Geeze make up your minds! But...I digress. So a drought. No WATER OMG!!!! Then suddenly El Nino and in one winter the reservoirs were all full again.
People proposed that....perhaps....we might build some more water storage then to plan for future droughts. Of course, the enviro nazis put a kabosh on the that idea. You might harm a butterfly or something. So. No storage. No planning and then comes the inevitable CYCLICAL drought and suddenly it is 1970's all over again (thankfully without the dreadful clothing and hairstyles). Were all gonna die and dry up. Or....maybe not.
Either way. We can't stop the weather. All you can do is be prepared. Good luck trying to get some sensible water management passed this time. People never learn
DBQ,
Bastrop is starting to become well known nationally thanks to the ginned up stories about Jade Helm. The interesting thing about Bastrop is it suffered some of the worst flooding this year as evidenced by its local dam being crested a few days prior to Houston being flooded. Back in 2011, it was the location of one of the worse wildfires (certainly worse in property damage value) during the Texas drought. It is why I didn't declare that reasonable water management means no more wildfires. I'm glad you understand this too.
Post a Comment