The "Con" artists have a commercial on television that says the ozone is down 20% over the last decade, suggesting that it's a good thing. They are saying that the EPA is hurting corporations by enacting new pollution controls. It's mind boggling that cons are allowed to deceive the American people like this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrPOUUgzYUc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q0gucIpZK8
I think that the second video is worse because it makes it sound like Americans won't have jobs if more regulations are made with regard to ozone depletion.
Yeah, they (cons) are really jumping on that epa fuck up in colorado too. I've got kin on the Animas river down there. Fucking tragic.
I've seen flammable gas come from water as well. Methane from the ground is odorless. It can get into the aquifer even without fracking, so it gives the frackers an out for weasel lawyers to exploit. Before hydraulic fracturing they just sent high explosives down the hole and hoped for the best. Scary stuff folks.
I feel modern environmentalism is also often a convient excuse to make money on things, such as pushing for carbon taxation, global carbon taxation at that. Think for a second and consider just how much stuff on earth is composed of carbon, or has carbon in it. That's a lot of opportunities to generate income for people who already have more money than they know what to do with.
Like when the cons say that CO2 is good for the environment. Plants love exhaust from all those cars.
It's about making money insofar as we live in a capitalist society and if you don't turn a profit you're going to go out of business... and yes, for that reason environmentalism needs to be profitable to really work, but it has nothing to do with the government trying to rip people off. Wherever carbon taxation has been implemented it has resulted in tax cuts in other areas, and in BC Canada households have PROFITED from the tax. All it really does is mean that businesses have an incentive to keep their emissions low-- this is what right wingers repeatedly, aggressively refuse to understand. They bury their heads in conspiracy sites and regurgitate lies and gossip and then mock anyone who disagrees... and so the ridiculous idea that a carbon tax is going to make everyone poor keeps circulating and nobody ever learns anything. I honestly think that every conservative has a panic button in their brain, and that every time someone says the word 'tax', you get irrationally upset and stop listening or caring about anything except how evil the government is and how taxes are bad. And it's a tax on EMISSIONS, not carbon in general. The carbon that doesn't enter the atmosphere isn't a problem for anyone. The only way it will affect people is if the corporations and energy producers pass the cost of their emissions on to the customers. But of course the customers will have lower taxes so it should even out. Meanwhile, the corporations will have incentives to lower their prices by lowering their emissions, so they will crunch some numbers and develop ways of doing what they do without wrecking the planet. As it is, it is more profitable to wreck the planet and use people like you to spread doubt and general idiocy, so that is what they are doing.
yes theres a lot of carbon on earth, and the amount of it remains the same ... its pretty much a constant. Thing is though that it matters where this carbon is. Most of the carbon on the planet is tied up in living things, in rocks, in the ocean and in the atmosphere. The carbon moves though the carbon cycle which stays in equilibrium but burning fossil fuels goes completely around the carbon cycle. Burning wood producing the same amount of C02 as the equivalent amount of coal has a smaller carbon footprint because wood is a renewable resorce and growing another tree will take carbon out of the atmosphere and offset the carbon released through combustion, the carbon stays within the natural carbin cycle. it'd be great if they really did care about the environment but i kinda agree that if there werent money in it that they wouldnt care any longer which is the sad thing about the state of our world .. where everything revolves around making some peices of worthless green paper. if you want innovation, technological advancement and achievement then capitalism as it is today is a pretty shitty system. Companies go to great lengths and much effort to protect their "secrets" and keep them secret ... so everbody kind of ends up reinventing the wheel over and over instead of sharing so maube for once we could get past wheels and on to the next thing
http://environment.about.com/od/whatyoucando/a/best_trees.htm Which Trees Offset Global Warming Best?
Just to clarify; high altitude ozone is good, ground level ozone is bad. Ozone blocks harmful UV rays, but breathing it in is toxic to mammals. It's supposed to be up higher than airplanes fly. The smell of ozone is that strong, freaky scent that you encounter sometimes just after an intense thunderstorm, when ozone has been created by lightning strikes.
The cons do not care what they are saying. In a sense, they are right not to. The whole thing is just a mockery of daily existence. It's just like England all over again. They're playing golf and riding in helicopters having a jolly old time while the rest of us are stapling plastic bags to pieces of cardboard while our whole families are dying. The problems are going to be solved. It doesn't matter who is in office. They sufficiently realize that we have the numbers and the audacity to throw this entire place into the fucking fire. It's just a matter of "Who is a more cunning politician?" And me, I just don't find any of these lackluster fucks fascinating. I'd say Hillary is actually the most fascinating. She seems like she's having a great fucking time. This is just the spur of the moment thing, I am stoned, but I think I will vote for Hillary.
this is an apples and oranges thing. while environmental concern is economically exploited to some degree, largely by conservative economic interests and greed, wishing to muddy the waters and create confusion in the popular mind, in no way does this diminish the legitimacy of such concern. to suggest that it in any way does, seem to me, at the very least, just i tiny bit irresponsible.
