Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
The mountain states have been in a draught for years. Of course it has been blamed on climate change. Now we get the Yellowstone River flood and IT'S being blamed on climate change. We actually welcome the rain. Just not the flood.

I get the Montana weather alerts on my phone. I think it was June 12th the storm hit. 4 to 8 inches of snow in the passes and 20 inches up in the mountains. Rain at lower elevations.

ON another note, while the US is eliminating carbon the Chinese aren't. They produce over 4 billion tons of coal a year and consumption is increasing 7% a year. They buy another 4 billion tons from the Ruskies. They plan to build 170 more coal fired plants in the next ten years. Last year they went through rolling blackouts because of a coal shortage.

Everything we do is being negated by the Chinese. They say they will start working on going carbon neutral in the year 2060. But you know how those Chi-Comms lie.
Well it isn't just the mountain states that have been in a drought for years. Maybe these aren't even droughts anymore?

I am no fan of the Chinese but they have more of a chance of making progress just because of their top-down dictatorship type government.

BTW, China has said they'll be carbon-neutral by 2060. That is not when they claim they'll start.

The best part is the conspiracy that deniers claim (liberal this-that yadda yadda) is a bit crazy. They're basically suggesting some Illuminati type shit that transcends both the Chinese and Western countries in this crazy global conspiracy. huh? whaaa?

The fact of the matter is that all that oil/gas took many many millions of years to be created and we're releasing it over the course of 1-200 years, but yea, clever bringing up forest fires which are going to get progressively worse until those eco-systems die off/trees are gone. It is more the cause and not a symptom, right?

BTW, if trees burned naturally it'd be carbon neutral affair as they would recapture the CO2 as the trees etc grew back. That won't happen when their environment is inhabitable to their species.
If all the tree’s disappear there will be no oxygen. Trees absorb carbon and emit oxygen as a waste product.

Do you know why the climate changers don’t advocate a worldwide effort to plant millions of trees that will soak up carbon?











































Because there is no money to be made doing it….
Such a simplistic view of the world.

BTW it isn't just trees that do photosynthesis. It is all plants.

There is money in growing trees if someone pays you to do it, but you also need somewhere to plant and water them. Similar to just about everything else.

And they do advocate planting trees. All the time but they're smart enough to realize buying land and planting trees is a silly solution. It has nothing to do with money numbers but with all the other numbers.