Unfortunately, natural gas is not environmentally friendly. We've been lied to by the fracking industry (surprise!). Natural gas does have less CO2 than coal but it still emits CO2. The worse part is that natural gas itself is 34 times as potent as CO2 in the global warming department and fracking is particularly "leaky" leading to lots of this greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. So... we need to get off of all fossil fuels, including natural gas.
It's hard to know what to do when you have more money than you can possibly spend. What a dilemma! Let's see... 10 minutes of fear, joy, excitement? Or... give some money to "poor people"?... not much excitement in that. I just don't have a frame of reference for the dilemma these people face.
I worked in Reno where all it takes is "some dude". I think the EtOH and late night gambling makes for easy targets. You must have stronger men in your area.
Greenpeace isn't the problem. They have no money and no political power. Corporations are the problem. They have a large vested interest $ in the current carbon economy so don't want renewables... they're probably fine with nuclear power (except the oil and natural gas companies).
I know it's not fashionable to RTFA but the IPCC report does propose actual solutions and costs those solutions (which will have negligible net cost)... they are the well-know solutions of more renewables, nuclear power and carbon sequestration along with a carbon tax. The problem is that the corporations which have become rich on the current high CO2 emission path control the world's economies and governments so I can safely predict that nothing meaningful will be done and that we are all literally toast.
Back when I worked in the ER, a common complaint was that "some dude" just attacked me. I always thought that if we could just find "some dude", we could solve a lot of problems.
About 50% of China's pollution is caused by exports.... so all that cheap crap you buy that's made in China counts towards China's pollution. The corporations have not only outsourced all the jobs to China, but the pollution too. The pollution from shipping the junk from China (boats and planes) isn't tallied in any accounts so total pollution is more. So, the pollution drifting over San Francisco is just the pollution catching up with the stuff shipped over and sitting on WalMart shelves.
If you're a white male, most of the time you'll get a pass. If you are a person of color, they can go on a fishing expedition and will probably find something "suspicious" to prompt further harassment.
On my ballot in California, you can leave any section blank. (It uses fill in the circles on paper which is then scanned to read). I just voted (absentee ballot) and did leave several sections blank (local elections where I had no clue about any of the candidates). In Nevada, it's even better. They have a "None of the above" selection.
No, actually these natural processes take genes from all different types of organisms from both the plant and animal kingdom and inject them into vastly different species. Most of the time it doesn't work out but sometimes you get a useful mutation that benefits the organism.
Yes, of course it redistributed income from higher income people to lower income people (as one of it's side effects). This is actually a good thing since most of the rest of the US economy is set up to redistribute income from the poor and middle class to the 1%. ACA is a small step in the right direction.
Galileo is pretty much the only person in the history of the Church's reign over the Western world that could be said to be persecuted.
Do you really believe this? I think you misspoke. I think that there is over whelming evidence that the Church has routinely and persistently persecuted many people. Here's a short list: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/... A longer discussion here: http://www.heretication.info/_...
Since this process took many millions of years, it's unlikely that you'd be on the wrong side of it in your short life. The climate is changing rapidly now and that is much more likely to be a threat to you in your lifetime.
I guess you've never heard of bacteriophages (and similar organisms) which do take genes from one organism and put them in another... billions of times every day.
Billions of times a day, natural processes substitute random genes from all different kinds of organisms. Natural selection takes care of it. We are not in a Frankenstein movie... more like Rube Goldberg.
What is the difference between selective breeding and genetic modification?... nothing. GM is more efficient at selecting genes but no qualitative difference. BTW, mother nature has been doing GM for millions of years and randomly inserting genes across all types of organisms and so far, that seems to be working out just fine. So please, Keep Calm and Don't Panic.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, natural gas is not environmentally friendly. We've been lied to by the fracking industry (surprise!). Natural gas does have less CO2 than coal but it still emits CO2. The worse part is that natural gas itself is 34 times as potent as CO2 in the global warming department and fracking is particularly "leaky" leading to lots of this greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.
So... we need to get off of all fossil fuels, including natural gas.
It's hard to know what to do when you have more money than you can possibly spend. What a dilemma! ... not much excitement in that.
Let's see... 10 minutes of fear, joy, excitement?
Or... give some money to "poor people"?
I just don't have a frame of reference for the dilemma these people face.
2007? What happened in 2007? Run up to the financial crash when Wall Street screwed everyone?
I think we should go back to 1776 to get the real story.
... or he could be worse...
... and to a "well regulated militia"...
I worked in Reno where all it takes is "some dude". I think the EtOH and late night gambling makes for easy targets.
You must have stronger men in your area.
Irony is not realizing that we all live on the same planet and exporting pollution to another country solves nothing.
Greenpeace isn't the problem. They have no money and no political power. Corporations are the problem. They have a large vested interest $ in the current carbon economy so don't want renewables... they're probably fine with nuclear power (except the oil and natural gas companies).
I know it's not fashionable to RTFA but the IPCC report does propose actual solutions and costs those solutions (which will have negligible net cost)... they are the well-know solutions of more renewables, nuclear power and carbon sequestration along with a carbon tax.
The problem is that the corporations which have become rich on the current high CO2 emission path control the world's economies and governments so I can safely predict that nothing meaningful will be done and that we are all literally toast.
For more information (and interesting read), Naomi Klein's "This Changes Everything"
http://books.simonandschuster....
Back when I worked in the ER, a common complaint was that "some dude" just attacked me.
I always thought that if we could just find "some dude", we could solve a lot of problems.
So you think that the US should be forced back to a pre-industrial society?
About 50% of China's pollution is caused by exports.... so all that cheap crap you buy that's made in China counts towards China's pollution. The corporations have not only outsourced all the jobs to China, but the pollution too.
The pollution from shipping the junk from China (boats and planes) isn't tallied in any accounts so total pollution is more.
So, the pollution drifting over San Francisco is just the pollution catching up with the stuff shipped over and sitting on WalMart shelves.
If you're a white male, most of the time you'll get a pass. If you are a person of color, they can go on a fishing expedition and will probably find something "suspicious" to prompt further harassment.
On my ballot in California, you can leave any section blank. (It uses fill in the circles on paper which is then scanned to read). I just voted (absentee ballot) and did leave several sections blank (local elections where I had no clue about any of the candidates).
In Nevada, it's even better. They have a "None of the above" selection.
No, actually these natural processes take genes from all different types of organisms from both the plant and animal kingdom and inject them into vastly different species. Most of the time it doesn't work out but sometimes you get a useful mutation that benefits the organism.
Yes, of course it redistributed income from higher income people to lower income people (as one of it's side effects).
This is actually a good thing since most of the rest of the US economy is set up to redistribute income from the poor and middle class to the 1%.
ACA is a small step in the right direction.
I have my own cloud... and so should you... for no reason other than to say that you can do it and have done it.
owncloud.org
Thanks for the clarification.
... with a certain probability of kitty in each...
Still can't figure out if the cat is alive or dead since's it's both.
Or right.
Galileo is pretty much the only person in the history of the Church's reign over the Western world that could be said to be persecuted.
Do you really believe this? I think you misspoke.
I think that there is over whelming evidence that the Church has routinely and persistently persecuted many people.
Here's a short list:
http://amazingdiscoveries.org/...
A longer discussion here:
http://www.heretication.info/_...
Since this process took many millions of years, it's unlikely that you'd be on the wrong side of it in your short life.
The climate is changing rapidly now and that is much more likely to be a threat to you in your lifetime.
I guess you've never heard of bacteriophages (and similar organisms) which do take genes from one organism and put them in another... billions of times every day.
Billions of times a day, natural processes substitute random genes from all different kinds of organisms.
Natural selection takes care of it.
We are not in a Frankenstein movie... more like Rube Goldberg.
What is the difference between selective breeding and genetic modification?... nothing.
GM is more efficient at selecting genes but no qualitative difference.
BTW, mother nature has been doing GM for millions of years and randomly inserting genes across all types of organisms and so far, that seems to be working out just fine.
So please, Keep Calm and Don't Panic.