Didn't you ever hear the argument: "If just ONE life is saved" that what ever it is is "worth it"? The argument is that if one child's life is saved by "gun control" then the fact that you are putting in place the pre-conditions for the genocide of millions (proven by history over and over again) is supposed to not be important and is supposed to be ignored. It all goes to show it's about politics and not facts.
Jim,
Are those 5000 persons who have died from the heat or are they what our media calls "heat-related deaths" which apparently means anyone who dies while the weather was hot. I'm guessing you really don't have any real figures. As far as I can tell from listening to the media most deaths were the result of persons with preconditions (asthma etc.) having a reaction to the smoke from the forest fires. Of course they pointed noted that it's SO hot in Moscow and the forests SO baked to tinder dryness that the 100 degree heat just kept setting the forests on fire as fast as they could put them out!
Whew! Of course, I'm betting you never read the book Fahrenheit 451. Of course, it is said that the real number is 842 degrees Fahrenheit. (When paper and wood products have spontaneous combustion from the heat). The bottom line is the media is as usual spewing a bunch of "plausible" explanations while the public (you) just suck them up as truth. Sorry, the hot weather is not "starting" forest fires. And therefore not "killing people".
Anyway, please make a note of this: Weather is not climate. Climate is a proper average of weather. Variations (even extreme variations) of weather are not proof that climate is changing. To understand all this you'd need to understand the nature of Nile-like statistics. It seems likely to me that the alarmists actually DO understand Nile-like statistics and are using the fact that most people DO NOT understand how they work to fuel their panic machine.
Consider a similar argument: "Better that fifty guilty men go free than one innocent person unjustly suffer."
What's magic about "50"? If we must avoid punishing an innocent person at all costs, why not 100 go free? Why not 1000? Why not 10,000? In fact, why have punishment at all?
If all the ice in Arctic Ocean melted, the sea level wouldn't rise a millimeter.
And your conjuecture of "CO2 up to 600-700 PPM would only make the world about 1.5 degrees C warmer," I suggest may very well be cause and effect backwards. It's the warmer earth that causes increased CO2, not the reverse.
rant mode on-
I'm gettin' old. I remember when that place was new and high-tech.
If I was benign dictator of the universe, anybody who built a new stadium would have to pay off, out of their own money, any remaining public bonds for the stadium it is replacing. A massive public or semi-public building, almost always involving tax dollars directly or indirectly, having a service life less than 60-75 years, is a sin. In the last five years, they have demolished several less than 30 years old. Aside from the pillage of the public treasury, it can't be good for the environment to expend that many calories on construction and demolition, along with the incidental contamination inevitable any time Big Yellow Machines are involved.
There was a time when edifices lasted a century or more. We are becoming a country without a past, other than in old photographs. (Not that many people keep or look at those any more either. Lotsa luck finding 50 year old digital photos in Grandpa's attic.)
rant mode off..
The principals consider themselves owners of a money-making enterprise, not curators of a museum. Times have changed; there's money - a lot of money - to be made in sky-boxes with hot tubs and such. The old stadiums just can't accomodate the needs of the uber rich.
No problem. Let the uber rich buy them without my help.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:29:16 -0500, "HeyBub" wrote Re Re: OT: Texas to EPA: "That stinks":
Well said.
Errr...does the word "hose" evoke any fix?
Errr...does the word "hose" evoke any fix? No. That crap doesnt just rinse off. Homeowners cant go up every month to scrub the roof.
did.http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/obamas-climat...>>
Plenty of conventional roofs around here with white asphalt composition shingles. North Texas
But if Greenland's landborne ice sheet melts, sea level rises about 7 meters.
From sometime millions of years ago to a couple hundred years ago, that was the case. Back then, the amount of carbon in the global ecosystem was pretty constant. Atmospheric CO2 level was a positive feedback system, following and amplifying a global temperature change whose root cause was something else - often the Milankovitch cycles. Temperature affects ratio of CO2 in the atmosphere to that in oceans, while CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
In the past several decades, atmospheric CO2 was rising despite the fact that nature (mainly the oceans) has been removing CO2 from the atmosphere.
I stand corrected. I see that GAF, for example, does indeed make a white shingle.
I think they are less common than they were in the 1970s, more due to style than anything else. My first house was built in 1972 with white shingles. The first re-roof was with a darker color.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.