[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Right here, most of the time. And I agree with you! So what does that tell you about corporate big wigs. They care nothing about you or anyone. They care nothing about doing the right or ethical (or "Christian") thing. Nothing stands in the way of money and power. And what do we get? A recycled old slogan, misinformation, lost jobs and a dirtier planet.

I agree for the most part. Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power". There are laws against monopolistic behavior, for example. There are laws about clean air in the US used by the EPA. The question is - Do we always have Good Government decisions. in the US it is most of the time, but NOT always. Another example of the importance of voting. We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems. Money spent on having a well educated America is money well spent.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I agree for the most part. Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power". There are laws against monopolistic behavior, for example. There are laws about clean air in the US used by the EPA. The question is - Do we always have Good Government decisions. in the US it is most of the time, but NOT always. Another example of the importance of voting. We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems. Money spent on having a well educated America is money well spent.

Well said!

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I agree for the most part. Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power". There are laws against monopolistic behavior, for example. There are laws about clean air in the US used by the EPA. The question is - Do we always have Good Government decisions. in the US it is most of the time, but NOT always. Another example of the importance of voting. We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems. Money spent on having a well educated America is money well spent.

If only the Dept of Energy was effective in educating our children

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Bullspit! Believe it, or don't. If you don't, then you figure it out. Simple as that.

I have been on many forums over the years, and proper ETIQUETTE has always been that any poster asserting a position always supported that position with links to the credible sources from which information was obtained. Failure to do so was considered the equivalent of lack of credibility.

It's a free country (at least it used to be), so you can post in any manner you choose. But proper protocol always dictates that everyone should link to their own claims.

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power".

There is no such thing. Only NECESSARY government. The less they get involved with, the better.

We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems.

That ship has sailed. You want critical thinking, but today's public education is more about indoctrination. That's why there is increasing demand for school choice and home schooling. When you have large numbers of kids that can't read or do math, the system has failed.

[in2it17]

It is astonishing someone still thinks CO2 is having any effect on the climate. This has been discredited by real accredited scientists who do not accept money from corporations, leftist groups, government entities, or NGOs.

[lpkruege1]

Originally Posted by skarra

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory and Scripps CO2 Program).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

So, 400 parts per million, is equal to 0.04% of our atmosphere. Plants require CO2 to produce oxygen.
While plants can utilize a range of CO2 levels, the optimal percentage for most plant life is considered to be around 0.03% or 300 parts per million (ppm), which is close to the current atmospheric concentration; however, increasing CO2 levels within a reasonable range can often boost plant growth in controlled environments like greenhouses up to around 1000 ppm.
Key points about CO2 and plant life:
Minimum level:
Plants can still photosynthesize at lower CO2 levels, but their growth will be significantly reduced.
Optimal level:
Most plants experience maximum photosynthetic activity around 300-1000 ppm CO2.
According to research, the minimum CO2 concentration considered necessary for plant life is around 150 parts per million (ppm), below which plants struggle to survive and reproduce effectively; at extremely low levels, photosynthesis would be significantly hampered and plants could die off.

So, this is me analyzing those numbers. If the plants die off below 150 parts per million, and stop producing oxygen, at what level do scientists agree we should we reduce CO2 to? How much CO2 is actually manmade compared to forest fires, volcanos, and other natural releases of CO2?

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

If only the Dept of Energy was effective in educating our children

I would rather the Dept. of Educations was effective in education our children...

The Dept. of Energy should concern itself with making sure we have plentiful and affordable energy...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

There is no such thing. Only NECESSARY government. The less they get involved with, the better.


That ship has sailed. You want critical thinking, but today's public education is more about indoctrination. That's why there is increasing demand for school choice and home schooling. When you have large numbers of kids that can't read or do math, the system has failed.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Post it enough times to bring your post count to an even 15,000! Just a suggestion.

15001, if I want try to get 50000 posts knock someone off home plate, or maybe the first to 100000. Heck why not try for million. Notice I don’t don’t like anybody telling me what to do on public forum where B s rules.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

Yep, but the subject was countries.

And what countries are these cities in? O wait we don’t count cities in countries.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Second that.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

I have been on many forums over the years, and proper ETIQUETTE has always been that any poster asserting a position always supported that position with links to the credible sources from which information was obtained. Failure to do so was considered the equivalent of lack of credibility.

It's a free country (at least it used to be), so you can post in any manner you choose. But proper protocol always dictates that everyone should link to their own claims.

Glad you have such vast forum experience. Here is my experience on this forum. When asked to provide proof or give an answer or name credible sources, and having done so, the opposition simply "poopoos" says that answers is wrong, proof isn't acceptable and sources (like NOAA, UN, NATO, NASA, etc) are not credible, and gives you the brush off. So, what is the point of providing all that work when you know that their position is to deny anything contrary to party line. It is a free country, so I will get my information from what I deem the best and most reliable sources. Then if I make a statement, like in court, it is up to the opposition to do their own work to prove me wrong if they want to. Most of these posts, and many of mine, are opinions anyway. So I'll say, "yes it is", and you say, "no it isn't ".

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by in2it17

It is astonishing someone still thinks CO2 is having any effect on the climate. This has been discredited by real accredited scientists who do not accept money from corporations, leftist groups, government entities, or NGOs.

Yea, right! Oh! Wait. You're being sarcastic, right? 😶😶

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

15001, if I want try to get 50000 posts knock someone off home plate, or maybe the first to 100000. Heck why not try for million. Notice I don’t don’t like anybody telling me what to do on public forum where B s rules.

I don't tell people what to do. I only make suggestions ... even if I don't word them as suggestions. 🙂🙃🙂