User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 9:45:10 AM EDT
[#1]
the issues are still very active, but the public imagination has moved on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 9:46:32 AM EDT
[#2]
Because those were Bush's fault
Honestly I don't know. Trees love CO2 and we love making it |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 9:47:16 AM EDT
[#3]
From my understanding the destruction of the rain forest is still an issue. The hole in the ozone layer issue was solved by a relatively easy change over to different chemicals in the products that were believed to be causing the hole.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 9:51:01 AM EDT
[#4]
Because now the left is focused on gun control when we should be focused on the incompetent asshole in the White house. Its for the children.
Smoke and mirrors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 9:55:53 AM EDT
[#5]
Soooo 1990's. No scientific proof and only hysterical mother earth types believe the claptrap.
Move on - the USA is not destroying the planet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:03:32 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: Soooo 1990's. No scientific proof and only hysterical mother earth types believe the claptrap. Move on - the USA is not destroying the planet. yep. them satellite pichers of trees disappearin is as faked as that there "moon landing". |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:03:36 AM EDT
[#7]
The Montreal Protocol alleviated ozone depletion by limiting amount of CFC's produced.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:05:09 AM EDT
[#8]
"Acid Rain"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:05:56 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: From my understanding the destruction of the rain forest is still an issue. The hole in the ozone layer issue was solved by a relatively easy change over to different chemicals in the products that were believed to be causing the hole. "solved" is probably not the right word. 'stabilized' might be better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:06:26 AM EDT
[#10]
Uh, rainforest destruction is still a very big deal.
People don't care though, they grew tired of it and moved on. I mean seriously, what are we going to do about it anyway, force other governments to ensure people stop utilizing their land? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:07:19 AM EDT
[#11]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:08:39 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
"Acid Rain" Ooooh yes!!!! [golfclap] What else do we no longer worry about? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:09:38 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Uh, rainforest destruction is still a very big deal. People don't care though, they grew tired of it and moved on. I mean seriously, what are we going to do about it anyway, force other governments to ensure people stop utilizing their land? there has been a significant shift in brazil, mainly due to market forces. many foreign companies divested or ceased doing business with brazil around 2005, which pressured the government to adopt conservation measures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:09:55 AM EDT
[#14]
Anthropogenic global climate change is a more sweeping method of pushing us towards our glorious cultural revolution.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:11:26 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: I think your mistaking "haven't heard about" with "not important".Quoted: "Acid Rain" Ooooh yes!!!! [golfclap] What else do we no longer worry about? For example: Socialism in the US, the cold war is over, so it must not be a problem anymore. Terrorism, hasn't been a major attack since 9/11, so its no longer and issue. Up until a few weeks ago: Assault weapons ban. Hasn't been passed since 1994, so its a dead issue. The list goes on and on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:11:28 AM EDT
[#16]
Many of the "issues" that are real issues are still there. They are no longer in the public eye IMHO because of both mission creep in agendas and John Q having the attention span of a gnat.
Quoted: Quoted: "Acid Rain" Ooooh yes!!!! [golfclap] What else do we no longer worry about? The impending Ice Age we were warned about in the 70's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:11:47 AM EDT
[#17]
I thought Obama was supposed to raise his hands in the air and the hole in the ozone layer was to magically close and the trees in the amazon would regrow, and the waters would recede and birds would sing, and ....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:13:01 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:17:24 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Quoted: Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:23:17 AM EDT
[#20]
We should all probably be dying before too long because of that BP oil spill in the gulf.
Also, we're likely all being irradiated by the Fukishima incident. Fear sells, for the most part nobody gives a shit about anything unless it may somehow effect them. Outside of a few hippies, nobody really cares about the lumber industry, the hole in the ozone layer, some power plant in Japan, a bit of oil in the ocean etc. But bring up that CO2 levels will rise and we'll all die/the world will heat up uncontrollably/our children will be born with flippers/there won't be anymore shrimp and people will buy papers to look into how they're going to be absolutely fucked in the future. Other examples include - SARS and also every single strain of influenza ever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:38:46 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever.
Where is the water going? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:40:26 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Quoted: "Acid Rain" Ooooh yes!!!! [golfclap] What else do we no longer worry about? Spotted Owls. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:48:35 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever. Where is the water going? into an unusable state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 10:48:48 AM EDT
[#24]
The big one when I was a teen in the '80s was the impending doom of running out of landfill space. We were doomed to live in our own garbage, a national episode of Hoarders!!!
 In reality, it was a scare tactic to encourage recycling and subsidize the beginnings of the recycling industry. Always follow the money... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:02:45 AM EDT
[#25]
I farm high ph ground, I'd love to get a bunch of acid rain, it would really help the productivity and fertility of the ground.
I've never understood how we will run out of water. In my area, the water has already been used 3 times before it gets to me, and I'm 200 miles from the continental divide. Ozone hole? By shrinking it, global warming is increased! Tell a granola head that and watch them foam at the mouth. http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/shrinking-ozone-hole-could-speed-global-warming A replenished ozone layer is good news for life on Earth — which will be protected from the sun's harmful UV light — but it could also profoundly alter how winds circulate around Antarctica, according to John Turner of the British Antarctic Survey, who presented his research to the conference in Norway. Currently the hole in the ozone layer acts as a huge vent in the atmosphere, keeping chilly Antarctic winds self-contained. As the hole shrinks, warmer winds may be able to break through the Antarctic shield. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:03:56 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever.
Where is the water going? into an unusable state. What state would that be exactly? Gaseous? Solid? Plasma? Vapor? So dirty that it cannot be cleaned? Rendered into it's component parts - oxygen and hydrogen? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:08:40 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: I farm high ph ground, I'd love to get a bunch of acid rain, it would really help the productivity and fertility of the ground. I've never understood how we will run out of water. In my area, the water has already been used 3 times before it gets to me, and I'm 200 miles from the continental divide. Ozone hole? By shrinking it, global warming is increased! Tell a granola head that and watch them foam at the mouth. http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/shrinking-ozone-hole-could-speed-global-warming IIRC water is a finite resource. It's a closed system, so it doesn't "go away" - it changes form. However, human population is ever-increasing. The challenge is find ways to wisely use the finite resource. The science guys may be in to correct me, but this is what I remember from Earth-Space Science back in the 70's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:10:18 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Quoted: into an unusable state. Quoted: Where is the water going?Quoted: Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever. Quoted: Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT,Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? New Jersey?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:11:08 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
From my understanding the destruction of the rain forest is still an issue. The hole in the ozone layer issue was solved by a relatively easy change over to different chemicals in the products that were believed to be causing the hole. There was never any definitive proof that "Freon" was destroying the ozone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:12:44 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Uh, rainforest destruction is still a very big deal. People don't care though, they grew tired of it and moved on. I mean seriously, what are we going to do about it anyway, force other governments to ensure people stop utilizing their land? Plus, Sting is getting on into his sixties now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:17:14 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
What state would that be exactly? Gaseous? Solid? Plasma? Vapor? So dirty that it cannot be cleaned? Rendered into it's component parts - oxygen and hydrogen? [quote tree removed - see how easy that was?] Someone please answer this. ^^^ |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:18:39 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever. Where is the water going? Somewhere other than back into the aquifer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:20:56 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: The problem isn't that the water is being destroyed.Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Where is the water going? into an unusable state. What state would that be exactly? Gaseous? Solid? Plasma? Vapor? So dirty that it cannot be cleaned? Rendered into it's component parts - oxygen and hydrogen? Someone please answer this. ^^^ The problem is it isn't going into the aquifer at a rate greater than or equal to its usage. This means that people who depend on that aquifer are going to have to look elsewhere in the future. Its not rocket surgery here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:24:20 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
Soooo 1990's. No scientific proof and only hysterical mother earth types believe the claptrap. Move on - the USA is not destroying the planet. This is true! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:25:39 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why don't we worry about the rainforests being destroyed anymore? Or the hole in the ozone layer going out of control? Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever.
Where is the water going? Somewhere other than back into the aquifer. When I pee into my toilet, it heads straight for the aquifer. Where do you pee? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:26:25 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:The problem isn't that the water is being destroyed.
The problem is it isn't going into the aquifer at a rate greater than or equal to its usage. This means that people who depend on that aquifer are going to have to look elsewhere in the future. Its not rocket surgery here. [quote tree removed] I appreciate it, but where's the hang-up point? Is it hanging in vapor form for too long before coming down as rain? To the ignorant (me), it would seem a natural and steady cycle of usage/replenishment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:28:58 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever.
Where is the water going? Somewhere other than back into the aquifer. So it isn't a shortage of water is it? It's a location issue, and a matter of competing for finite resources. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:31:27 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Well certainly some uses of water get transferred back to the aquifer, but plenty of others don't.Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Where is the water going? Somewhere other than back into the aquifer. When I pee into my toilet, it heads straight for the aquifer. Where do you pee? For example: watering crops. Allot of it ends up in the atmosphere to be rained somewhere else (aka, not in your aquifer). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:31:34 AM EDT
[#39]
Don't forget about smog, acid rain, and global cooling before them.
All of these things have the same groups of assholes screaming about them. They beat each one until the public is wore out on it, and then they change to the next one. What remains the same is their goals and their tactics. Play on emotion. Heavy on the graphics. Big on doom and gloom, fuck boring facts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:32:03 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Acid Rain, Water Shortage with no clean drinking water by 1999, CFC's, DDT, Because using a resource at a faster rate than its replenished is something that can continue forever. Where is the water going? Somewhere other than back into the aquifer. So it isn't a shortage of water is it? It's a location issue, and a matter of competing for finite resources. Aka, a shortage? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:35:43 AM EDT
[#41]
So much derp, hard to believe it isn't willful derp...
No, water is not being destroyed. The problem is that A LOT of the water we use is from CLEAN SOURCES that are being depleted. We will never run out of clean water. We will run out of cheap clean water. Just like oil - it isn't rocket science to create all the heptane, octane, whatever-the-fuck-tane you want, it just is a hell of a lot more expensive than pumping it out of the ground. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:36:44 AM EDT
[#42]
[quote tree removed]
Do we have less water on Earth than we did 1,000 years ago, or do we just have more people with a higher demand for water? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:42:26 AM EDT
[#43]
[quote tree removed]
Not in my AO. Must be your location. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:42:38 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
...snip... Do we have less water on Earth than we did 1,000 years ago, or do we just have more people with a higher demand for water? We have both less usable water on earth than we did 1,000 years ago, and we have more people with a higher demand for water. And to be clear, by 'usable water', I don't mean salt water, which yes, I know we have literally oceans of. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:44:48 AM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: Keep in mind the aquifers were built up over thousands of years in some cases. So one can withdraw decades of water accumulation in a year.Quoted: The problem is it isn't going into the aquifer at a rate greater than or equal to its usage. This means that people who depend on that aquifer are going to have to look elsewhere in the future. Its not rocket surgery here. I appreciate it, but where's the hang-up point? Is it hanging in vapor form for too long before coming down as rain? To the ignorant (me), it would seem a natural and steady cycle of usage/replenishment. What you seem to be asking is: "If the water is taken out at a faster rate, why doesn't it just go right back to the aquifer at a faster rate?" The answer is: Due to weather patterns, the extra water taken from these aquifers is easilly just deposited elsewhere on the earth that already has a bunch of water. It doesn't noticably in the increase in storm frequency in arid regions. The other problem is when subsidence occurs the soil layers can become unsuitable aquifers due to this densification. Thus, even if some measures were put into the place and more water was going into the aquifer than being used, it wouldn't be able to "go back" to the way it was previously as the soil is no longer capable of holding water, at least on the timescales practical for individual human lives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:46:44 AM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:
...snip... Do we have less water on Earth than we did 1,000 years ago, or do we just have more people with a higher demand for water? We have both less usable water on earth than we did 1,000 years ago, and we have more people with a higher demand for water. And to be clear, by 'usable water', I don't mean salt water, which yes, I know we have literally oceans of. Do you know that drinking water can be and is being made from salt water? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:47:19 AM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Quoted: So it isn't a shortage of water is it? It's a location issue, and a matter of competing for finite resources. Aka, a shortage? Do we have less water on Earth than we did 1,000 years ago, or do we just have more people with a higher demand for water? Again, isn't that the definition of a shortage? Or am I totally missing something?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:47:52 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
...snip... Do we have less water on Earth than we did 1,000 years ago, or do we just have more people with a higher demand for water? We have both less usable water on earth than we did 1,000 years ago, and we have more people with a higher demand for water. And to be clear, by 'usable water', I don't mean salt water, which yes, I know we have literally oceans of. Sounds good, but fails to account for the fact that in my AO, the salt water nearby is the major source for rainwater that recharges the groundwater less than 200 feet beneath my feet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:47:59 AM EDT
[#49]
None of those support controlling carbon by the government. And once you control carbon and energy you chokle the uppity US economy and bring use down a few notches to the level of Malawi.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 11:51:28 AM EDT
[#50]
[quote tree removed]
saline, mostly. exploitation of groundwater basically accelerates the movement of fresh water into the ocean. a lot of it goes back into the atmosphere as vapor, as well--evaporative loss from old center-pivot irrigation systems was nearly 30%. in both of these cases, you're taking available, useful fresh water and redirecting it back into the hydrologic cycle in an unusable state. the water still exists, but we can't use it. the water cycle is a budget. you can deficit spend for a while, but at some point the bill comes due. i think we can all agree on that.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
