Isnt he violating his contract with the Government here…Somewhere he has agreed to not become the idiot he appears to me, but gets a free pass from his brothers and sisters in DC.
Yes what about the thousand other scientest that state otherwise…
I guess I’m pretty dumb. People keep referring to “hot-house gases”. I would think, because plants in hot-houses emit OXYGEN, then hot house gases would be oxygen.
Plants absorb (inhale) Carbon Dioxide and “exhale” Oxygen. Do why do scientists keep referring to Carbon Dioxide as “hot-house gas”.
Would someone please help this dumb insurance guy understand?
And, I’ve never believed this junk about man-made global warming anyway. Me, I believe it’s just a natural cycle the earthy is going through.
“I guess I’m pretty dumb. People keep referring to “hot-house gases”. I would think, because plants in hot-houses emit OXYGEN, then hot house gases would be oxygen.
Plants absorb (inhale) Carbon Dioxide and “exhale” Oxygen. Do why do scientists keep referring to Carbon Dioxide as “hot-house gas”.
Would someone please help this dumb insurance guy understand?
And, I’ve never believed this junk about man-made global warming anyway. Me, I believe it’s just a natural cycle the earthy is going through.”
That’s actually a pretty reasonable question. The reason for the term “greenhouse gasses” is that pollution gasses such as ozone and CO2 act as an unnatural chemical “roof” that does not allow heat to escape into the upper reaches of the atmosphere as it natually would.
And as one of the posters here wrote, live between the dissenting opinions. Just as “greenhouse” emissions may not be as bad as some people say, doesn’t mean they are harmless either. There’s no need to bash politicians about their environmental views if you’re really just hating on them because of your own partisan politics.
Hi Joe: Thanks for the answer. Makes sense to me.
So, if I understand this correctly, if we were to cut down all the trees and destroy as much plant life as possible, we’d thus cut greenhouses gases and the scientists and the environmentalists would be happy?
Screw the scientists and environmentalists. Where would all that tax money end up? You know who would get this kind of tax shoved up their backsides……….the taxpayers. If it were to happen, it should be levied against manufacturers not consumers. We can’t even find a cure for the common cold much less solve global warming. Might as well enjoy what’s left of the planet while we can.
Don’t forget to smack some big fat emmissions taxes on all those pesky volcanoes. They’re spewing more crap into the atmosphere than the whole of mankind. Darn those things! They should pay out the nose!
Hansen and Al Gore tell us CO2 is the culprit, but cannot tell us what % of man made CO2 is in the atmosphere. Until they can provide this answer I’ll ignore them. Water vapor is CO2 and from what I read accounts for over 96% of the CO2 up there. So it appears this is a natural event, like the 6 ice ages and warming periods this Earth experienced before and nothing we can do about it anyway.
I think that each cow should be taxed based on their methane output.
And that ranchers and especially dairymen should get a tax credit for collecting methane gases at roof peaks and piping it into collecting tanks.
Then, the gases could be compressed and used to power tractors on the farm, reducing the purchase of LPG or diesel. Thus, the farmer/rancher gets tax relief and lower fuel costs.
If they then switched over to high-starch feedstocks, the methane productions could ramp up higher volumes, and milk and cheeses would be lighter and fluffier.
Think of all those friendly cows in the barn at night.
“Say, Elsie, was that YOU?”
“Hey Wilbur – – pull my hoof”
Would make cow-tipping a potentially hazardous trick, reducing the numbers of injured farm animals. Plus, rodeos would have to be real careful when selecting their herds. Could turn a joyride into an astro-blast.
Water vapor is NOT CO2. CO2 is carbon dioxide. Water vapor is water in a semi gas state or transition state between liquid and gas. If the water vapor gets hot enough then, it reverts to steam which is water in a gas state but, it is still water or H2O. By the way, lets remember that ice is also H20 but, in its solid state.
What about the scientists in the 70’s who told us (and tried to panic everyone) about “Global Cooling”?
What do they have to say?
I thought Al Gore discovered global warming
emissions
For optimum living conditions, live somewhere in between dissenting scientists.
Isnt he violating his contract with the Government here…Somewhere he has agreed to not become the idiot he appears to me, but gets a free pass from his brothers and sisters in DC.
Yes what about the thousand other scientest that state otherwise…
I guess I’m pretty dumb. People keep referring to “hot-house gases”. I would think, because plants in hot-houses emit OXYGEN, then hot house gases would be oxygen.
Plants absorb (inhale) Carbon Dioxide and “exhale” Oxygen. Do why do scientists keep referring to Carbon Dioxide as “hot-house gas”.
Would someone please help this dumb insurance guy understand?
And, I’ve never believed this junk about man-made global warming anyway. Me, I believe it’s just a natural cycle the earthy is going through.
“I guess I’m pretty dumb. People keep referring to “hot-house gases”. I would think, because plants in hot-houses emit OXYGEN, then hot house gases would be oxygen.
Plants absorb (inhale) Carbon Dioxide and “exhale” Oxygen. Do why do scientists keep referring to Carbon Dioxide as “hot-house gas”.
Would someone please help this dumb insurance guy understand?
And, I’ve never believed this junk about man-made global warming anyway. Me, I believe it’s just a natural cycle the earthy is going through.”
That’s actually a pretty reasonable question. The reason for the term “greenhouse gasses” is that pollution gasses such as ozone and CO2 act as an unnatural chemical “roof” that does not allow heat to escape into the upper reaches of the atmosphere as it natually would.
And as one of the posters here wrote, live between the dissenting opinions. Just as “greenhouse” emissions may not be as bad as some people say, doesn’t mean they are harmless either. There’s no need to bash politicians about their environmental views if you’re really just hating on them because of your own partisan politics.
Hi Joe: Thanks for the answer. Makes sense to me.
So, if I understand this correctly, if we were to cut down all the trees and destroy as much plant life as possible, we’d thus cut greenhouses gases and the scientists and the environmentalists would be happy?
Screw the scientists and environmentalists. Where would all that tax money end up? You know who would get this kind of tax shoved up their backsides……….the taxpayers. If it were to happen, it should be levied against manufacturers not consumers. We can’t even find a cure for the common cold much less solve global warming. Might as well enjoy what’s left of the planet while we can.
Don’t forget to smack some big fat emmissions taxes on all those pesky volcanoes. They’re spewing more crap into the atmosphere than the whole of mankind. Darn those things! They should pay out the nose!
Hrmph.
Hansen and Al Gore tell us CO2 is the culprit, but cannot tell us what % of man made CO2 is in the atmosphere. Until they can provide this answer I’ll ignore them. Water vapor is CO2 and from what I read accounts for over 96% of the CO2 up there. So it appears this is a natural event, like the 6 ice ages and warming periods this Earth experienced before and nothing we can do about it anyway.
I think that each cow should be taxed based on their methane output.
And that ranchers and especially dairymen should get a tax credit for collecting methane gases at roof peaks and piping it into collecting tanks.
Then, the gases could be compressed and used to power tractors on the farm, reducing the purchase of LPG or diesel. Thus, the farmer/rancher gets tax relief and lower fuel costs.
If they then switched over to high-starch feedstocks, the methane productions could ramp up higher volumes, and milk and cheeses would be lighter and fluffier.
Think of all those friendly cows in the barn at night.
“Say, Elsie, was that YOU?”
“Hey Wilbur – – pull my hoof”
Would make cow-tipping a potentially hazardous trick, reducing the numbers of injured farm animals. Plus, rodeos would have to be real careful when selecting their herds. Could turn a joyride into an astro-blast.
Hey Rick…I’m confused..since when is water vapor CO2? Water’s chemical make up is H2O.
Oh…I once saw a bumper sticker that maybe people concerned about energy costs should take to heart….
“Conserve energy. Fart in a jar”
Water’s chemical make up is H2O and water vapor is CO2. Also what you exhale is CO2. Check it out.
Water vapor is NOT CO2. CO2 is carbon dioxide. Water vapor is water in a semi gas state or transition state between liquid and gas. If the water vapor gets hot enough then, it reverts to steam which is water in a gas state but, it is still water or H2O. By the way, lets remember that ice is also H20 but, in its solid state.
Want to reduce carbon emissions? Why not put a cork in Hansen’s mouth? Seriously, what does Mr. Hansen suggest we do about Volcanoes?
Rick, I think you need to go back to high school and take chemistry class again. Or, at least listen to Kent.