PDA

View Full Version : Environmental discussion.


avariel
08-12-2004, 04:31 AM
John Kerry cannot fix the environment, no matter what his voting record is.

We’ll begin with air pollution; air pollution is a very key factor in the
dampening of the ozone layer. It has also been the traditional scapegoat for politicians who want to get their agenda through. Look deeper; the natural causes of air pollution outnumber the synthetic 5 to 1, colossal forest fires and volcanoes account for 80% of the natural causes. Volcanoes diffuse hundreds of thousands of tons of ash and sulfur into the atmosphere with every eruption, the “ring of fire,” is the conventional name for the “ring” of 75% of the 1500 active volcanoes in the world. This natural toxic discharge amounts for well over 50% of all air and water pollution, and is also ALMOST inescapable. How will John Kerry stop this natural phenomenon? He’ll hide it, or flip flop. There is only one way to revitalize the atmosphere, healthy forests, healthy forests can convert the subatomic particle diffusion, conventionally known as pollution, and create healthy breathable air. This is the ONLY way to reverse natural processes, with surrogate natural processes. Which candidate has supported the healthy forest initiative since his induction; you guessed it President George W. Bush. The Healthy Forest Initiative also subsumes the problem of forest fires which account for the remaining 30% of natural air pollution. "If [Kerry] was really serious about doing something for the environment, he would join President Bush and his call for funding hydrogen fuel technology, Clear Skies (Bush's market-based air pollution reduction plan) and healthy forests," Sheridan said.

Secondly, alternative energy sources. “Since the Industrial Revolution began, man has sought out the most efficient, cleanest, and in one word, perfect engine to run everything from large scale machines to hospitals. However, up until now, no solution had been found. One invention may change that. Hydrogen fuel cells, with hydrogen’s abundance, cleaner emissions, and greater efficiency than that of oil will be the solution to an eventually oil-barren world.” Oil, coal, and other energy sources like gas are non-renewable, they are fossil fuels formed from millions of years of geological compression of organic matter, brush, and dead animals. Because it is non-renewable, it will eventually dry up, and we will be faced with quite a quagmire, new methodology is essential. Guess which candidate also advocated hydrogen technology funding, George W., alternative energy will remove our dependence on oil and in a time when we contract from our enemies, this seems like a smart move. Hydrogen is an advanced and revolutionary form of energy, with almost limitless potential, and all Kerry can come up with is “wind power.”

John Kerry in his attempt to detach himself from Bush will (hopefully not) drastically encumber the capability for an effective extension of enthalpy. If global warming is in fact, (In Johnny’s own words) “the new cold war,” then we have already lost. John Kerry is an idiot.

The issue of the environment is not as cut and dry as Kerry would like you to know. Biology, the science of life, classifies life within ecosystems, each ecosystem has independent facets which fulfill specific niches, the niches are affected by the food chain and natural selection. Thermodynamics is the study of a systems ability to sustain itself, and John Kerry’s arbitrary distinctions that the environment can be “cured of it’s afflictions,” will doom his environmental plan. Environmental problems must be stopped before they engender a trickle down effect, with prevention, not cure. Nature is affected by countless factors hidden to the eye, and to the human capacity, the butterfly effect and the overall symbiosis of the planet are articulated best in the process of bacterial digestion of fallen leaves. How do you think leaves are “bio-degradable”; if this species of bacteria died off, we would be drowned in a sea of leaves, piling up over a few hundred years; there would be no sanctuary on earth. John Kerry is no genius; he’s a scientific interloper, kibitzing on matters a hippie of his stature doesn’t understand and shouldn’t try to discuss.

Instigator
08-12-2004, 05:41 AM
In a familiar refrain favoring development over conservation, the Bush Administration is ramping up to sacrifice some of America's finest Western wilderness to oil and gas development.

On July 15 the Bureau of Land Management proposed leasing the South Shale Ridge near DeBeque, Colorado, for oil and gas drilling. South Shale Ridge, a proposed wilderness area, provides critical habitat for Colorado wildlife, including more than a dozen endangered, threatened, or sensitive species.

According to the Colorado Environmental Coalition, South Shale Ridge contains "miles of washes, arroyos, and canyons that hide a seemingly endless array of hoodoos, geologic curiosities, and ancient stands of junipers and pinion pines." [1] BLM's decision was made without meaningful public involvement, despite years of commitments that public input would be considered before leasing.

Also slated by BLM for oil and gas development is the pristine Jack Morrow Hills area of southwest Wyoming. Under BLM's proposal, this 622,000-acre area, which contains seven wilderness study areas, the largest migratory game herd in the lower 48 states (50,000 pronghorn antelope) [2], Mormon pioneer trails, and numerous American Indian holy sites [3], would be laced with 205 oil and gas wells and 50 exploratory coalbed methane wells. And, under some studies cited by BLM, up to 1,077 natural gas wells, and 543 coalbed methane wells may be drilled in the area.

But even if all of the technically recoverable oil and gas in the Jack Morrow Hills were extracted, it would only provide the U.S. with 9 weeks of natural gas and 39 minutes of oil. [4]

SOURCES:
[1] Colorado Environmental Coalition.
[2] The Wilderness Society web site.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Biodiversity Conservation Alliance web site.

puppyroach
08-12-2004, 06:01 AM
And the american position in the Kyoto agreement was disasterous. They completely opposed the deal for reduced carbon dioxide discharge around the world. This I think is in part because they buy rights for more discharges from poorer country, which has made them the single largest supplier of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

And itīs good and fine saving forests (although based on my former speaker, they donīt :)) on the domestic area, but the problem is the great siberian forrests, the rain forrests in south america and southern Asia. And in these places American companies keep on destroying forests.

here are some comments from the Kyoto meeting in 2002:

"With the US already contributing to 25 % of the CO2 being dumped into the global blanket of air, Bush's plan is to make this number even higher. He very well could be the US president who brings about the end of world civilisation as we presently know it."
Alan Hanscom, Massachusetts, USA

"What Bush and Cheney are unleashing on the US public at large today is an insult to every US citizen, and an arrogant thumbing of the nose to the rest of the world, that must breathe our polluted air and bask in our warming globe." Phil, USA

"We are all environmental criminals. But there must be a new category for the United States. I would like to see a international justice system that would recognize this crime." Patrina Dumaru, Fiji

I fyou want input on the Kyoto agreement, check this one out - http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/pollution.html

I believe Kerry can finally close the gap between USA and the rest of the world on these issues, he may not do it, but I must believe it.