if man made co2 were for sure doing anything, you might find some peer reviewed science showing it. all the science shows co2 follows but lags ocean temps. so here is how I look at it. Is there a chance man made co2 is impacting the climate yes. Is it warming or cooling... we don't know because we don't know its impact on clouds. Is there a chance it is doing something significant.... yes... is that likely... no... because if it were signifciant we might have some science by now. Is there a chance more co2 is beneficial yes... So, if the scientists stated we don't really know but we think its a good idea to limit our output... I would say.. fine. But, don't lie to me about the science and use it as a device to create bigger govt.
Pope's schedule released. I don't see Futurecurrents coronation giving him the title of Sir Futurecurrents on the list. Sacrilege! http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2015/06/30/the-popes-schedule-for-septembers-trip-to-philadelphia/
But jerm. Every publishing climatologist in the world agrees that man is causing the warming. Yes, we need government to solve the problem. Govt is good. You are a nut job.
Awww, that's all right. I absolve him of his sin. No one's perfect. All in all Francis rocks. I really love how he is making the religious nut job righties like jem even crazier.
what the heck are you talking about. I already told you. Anyone is free to disagree with him at anytime on this subject and any subject he has spoken on so far. Overall I am glad he is trying to be more inclusive. If he makes a few gay people or others think that Jesus, God and or the church still loves them... great. I am all for that. Just last night I heard a bunch of young guys saying they are such sinners they are going to hell so they might as well enjoy the ride down... I think that is a damn shame. They were mostly speaking of how they will have sex with any women at anytime. I was thinking to myself people don't really think they have to go to hell because of (consensual) sex do they. God would have to forgive them would he not? he made us to want it. I would have said hey just talk to God and he and you can work it out. but I did not say anything I sort of regret I did not say it so I am saying it here. If Francis can get a few people know that they can still choose God...and I think that is what he is trying to do.. I am all for that. So in no way is Francis making me crazy. I support his intention on this most important subject even if I disagree with some of this statements.
Futurecurrents, One of the worst offenders of human forced GW are airplanes. Soon, we may have solar powered airplanes, with fuel used only as backup. There is a brighter future: KAPOLEI, Hawaii (AP) — A plane powered by the sun's rays landed in Hawaii Friday after a record-breaking five-day journey across the Pacific Ocean from Japan. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/techn...-in-hawaii-after-flight-from-japan/ar-AAcv6er
Doubt it. Travelers aren't going to settle for flying @ 30mph... even if it's environmentally friendly solar powered.
LOL! A person would have to be completely enumerate to believe this. The basic problem is crossing oceans. Trains are already quite efficient on land and do not require the concentrated fuels that are needed to power aircraft. The reasonable solutions for crossing oceans without fossil fuels are pretty well known: (1) Nuclear power. There are dozens of military vessels that do this all the time. (2) Lighter than air. This was state of the art at one time and maybe someday will come back. (3) Sailboats. Modern technology could make these much faster than they were in the days of sailing ships. But there would still be some difficulty in predicting how long a voyage would last. (4) Gliders. These would probably be less predictable than sailboats. (5) Submarines running on ballast. These are called "underwater gliders" and are in development now for military purposes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_glider (6) I'll add "tunnels" but digging a tunnel under the Pacific Ocean is beyond our capability right now. Same with very long bridges.
Wind, hydro, solar and nuclear make electricity. From electricity you can get all sorts of things including imitation fossil fuels. The problem is that the conversion is not very efficient. Hydrogen is easy and fairly efficient to make but difficult to store and move around. Here's your buddy's comment on it; he prefers batteries: Why a Hydogen Economy Doesn't Make Sense Phys.org, 2006 In a recent study, fuel cell expert Ulf Bossel explains that a hydrogen economy is a wasteful economy. The large amount of energy required to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds (water, natural gas, biomass), package the light gas by compression or liquefaction, transfer the energy carrier to the user, plus the energy lost when it is converted to useful electricity with fuel cells, leaves around 25% for practical use — an unacceptable value to run an economy in a sustainable future. Only niche applications like submarines and spacecraft might use hydrogen. .. http://phys.org/news/2006-12-hydrogen-economy-doesnt.html