yes sometimes the easiest solution is the best solution. I mean what has venus or mercury done for us lately? ... Think about how much cleaner the planet would be if we could just dump our waste into space. ..Oh the possibilitiesyeah that's it, just throw the trash out the window.
So turning the earth into a landfill isn't satisfying enough? Now you want a bunch of space garbage floating around outside our orbit too? 
Are you a dumb ass living in alabama or something? Please note that in Alaska Ms Palin does not kill polar bears, white people do not kill polar bears, biologists do not kill polar bears - - (are you ready for the punch line?) Only, and I mean only Alaska Natives are allowed by law to kill Polar bears.
did making the letters really big make you feel smart and important? I gotta ask, what is the ultimate point in trying to debunk climate change? We know the things we do are poisonous. Anyone who wanted to remain conscious and alive would not lock themselves in a garage with a running car, right? We are essentially doing that, but with hundreds of millions of cars and boats and jets in what is really a large contained space. Sure it might SEEM as though your exhaust just vanishes into an infinite atmosphere, but sadly, that is not the case. So the benefits of adjusting the way we do things are tangible whether there is or isn't man-made global climate change. The goal of disproving it is...? Exactly no good reason. Except to make some people money. Which is at best a quaternary goal when compared to the health of humanity and the planet. People get death threats all the time. They are essentially meaningless. Real killers kill without threatening anyone (just ask Yitzhak Rabin). People who make threats are unstable, inept, and petulant. The equivalent of an angry child. And i doubt the veracity of those quotes. I find it hard to believe that a scientist or a journalist would misspell SKEPTIC twice in one paragraph.Scientists threatened for questioning Man's impact on climate
Scientists threatened for 'climate denial'
By Tom Harper, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:24am GMT 03/11/2007
Scientists who questioned mankind's impact on climate change have
received death threats and claim to have been shunned by the
scientific community.
They say the debate on global warming has been "hijacked" by a
powerful alliance of politicians, scientists and environmentalists
who have stifled all questioning about the true environmental impact
of carbon dioxide emissions.
Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of
Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since
raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate
change.
One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would
not live to see further global warming.
"Western governments have pumped billions of dollars into careers and
institutes and they feel threatened," said the professor.
"I can tolerate being called a sceptic because all scientists should
be septics, but then they started calling us deniers, with all the
connotations of the Holocaust. That is an obscenity. It has got
really nasty and personal."
Last week, Professor Ball appeared in The Great Global Warming
Swindle, a Channel 4 documentary in which several scientists claimed
the theory of man-made global warming had become a "religion",
forcing alternative explanations to be ignored.
Richard Lind zen, the professor of Atmospheric Science at
Massachusetts Institute of Technology - who also appeared on the
documentary - recently claimed: "Scientists who dissent from the
alarm ism have seen their funds disappear, their work derided, and
themselves labeled as industry stooges.
"Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they
fly in the face of the science."
Dr Myles Allen, from Oxford University, agreed. He said: "The Green
movement has hijacked the issue of climate change. It is ludicrous to
suggest the only way to deal with the problem is to start micro
managing everyone, which is what environmentalists seem to want to
do."
Nigel Calder, a former editor of New Scientist, said: "Governments
are trying to achieve unanimity by stifling any scientist who
disagrees. Einstein could not have got funding under the present
system."
out.
There is so much wrong with this I don't know where to begin... lol
The letters seem normal to me... what are you talking about?
It is amusing to me.
Well i was talking more in the sense of harmful chemicals that no one wants to store in their own state, like nuclear waste or something else that isnt recyclable. (FYI: most of the Nuclear waste we have stored is recyclable)There is so much wrong with this I don't know where to begin... lol
We need to attack the root of the problem, not cover it up. The issue is that we are using processes to create materials that are harmful to the planet. There are other processes that create "green" materials that are biodegradable. They just cost more, and everything boils down to economics.
We need to improve upon our recycling programs, and rather than trying to get rid of our "waste" we need to reprocess it and use it again. If we keep throwing everything into outer space, eventually we will not have enough raw materials to continue supporting the growth of our planet.
We have created this concept of trash, and it is so accepted in the minds of everyone that we don't think twice about it. We need to focus on solutions to cutting down on the creation of waste and more into recycling. Recycling takes a lot of energy, but if that were obtained through fusion or solar energy, we would be on the right path.
Just my $0.02
yeah maybe in zoos, But i doubt anyone is going to the tundra an dfucking with them.
"lazy people"? have you traded your car in for a bicycle yet?Well i was talking more in the sense of harmful chemicals that no one wants to store in their own state, like nuclear waste or something else that isnt recyclable. (FYI: most of the Nuclear waste we have stored is recyclable)
But yes you have the right idea. Thing is its not just economics that is a problem with recycling, ITS LAZY PEOPLE!!! Honestly we should make recycling a law. It should be unlawful to just pile trash into a trash can, not caring were it goes (like 95% of americans do). Also you have to consider how much energy it takes to recycle trash. We should use trash as fuel to recycle other trash. But then another problem is the emissions from burning all that trash. ..But on the plus side all of these things should and can be solved. ...
Thing is the majority of people in this country dont really care about recycling or the future of the planet. We should really begin to educate people on how to be better consumers, buying things that are easily recyclable, while also creating laws against being wasteful. its really the only way we can get EVERYONE to do their part.
This is trueHe is 100% incorrect and his film was a joke for those who do a bit of investigating. By the way when he was VP for 8 years he didn't give a rats arse. After he loses a humiliating defeat (and it was humiliating, he needed only to win his home state to be Pres., you know the folks that KNOW him), only after his defeat does he REMAKE himself as a climate Guru. Except like almost everything Gore says, the truth is nowhere nearby. He's laughing all the way to the bank.
Global warming OR cooling (temps have been down since 1998 is caused by the SUN. there is no correlation between carbon levels and temp. swings...NONE. However the sun's activity parallels the earths temp swings almost exactly. Problem is we can't tax the sun.
Nuff said.
out.
Your pattern of thought is headed in the right direction. Waste reclamation and recycling would be a good start to bettering our planet indeed.
