Reply With QuoteThat's not even discussion worthy.
Go ahead, defend this crap ultra.
Walking does more than driving to cause global warming, a leading environmentalist (Chris Goodall) has calculated.
So, cars, and your boat, are not as bad as just swimming at the sand-bar, or walking down the dock to your boat.
TOWING your boat a mile to the river is better than walking without it.
Food production is now so energy-intensive that more carbon is emitted providing a person with enough calories to walk to the shops than a car would emit over the same distance. The climate could benefit if people avoided exercise, ate less and became couch potatoes.
The sums were done by Chris Goodall, campaigning author of How to Live a Low-Carbon Life.
Basically, driving a car 3 miles puts 2 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Walking 2 miles takes 180 callories, requiring 100 grams of beef, causing 8 pounds of CO2 to be put into the atmosphere, 4x as much.
What if, instead of beef, the walker drank a glass of milk? The average person would need to drink 420ml – three quarters of a pint – to recover the calories used in the walk. Modern dairy farming emits the equivalent of 1.2kg of CO2 to produce the milk, still more pollution than the car journey.
Here is more of your beloved "Global Warming "Science"" lunacy that you support ultra. Care to support THIS????????
Cattle farming is notorious for its perceived damage to the environment, based on what scientists politely call “methane production” from cows. The gas, released during the digestive process, is 21 times more harmful than CO2 . Organic beef is the most damaging because organic cattle emit more methane.
But, if I eat beef, and walk a mile, It's worse than driving a mile. !?!?!?!??
Michael OÂ’Leary, boss of the airline Ryanair, has been widely derided after he was reported to have said that global warming could be solved by massacring the worldÂ’s cattle.
The food industry is estimated to be responsible for a sixth of an individualÂ’s carbon emissions.
So, what are you doing to reduce your "carbon footprint" in THIS area?
The ideal diet would consist of cereals and pulses. “This is a route which virtually nobody, apart from a vegan, is going to follow,” Mr Goodall said.
Whatever the heck a "pulse" is.
Here's someone who actually knows what he's talking about:
I do think we should all be really concerned about emissions - the truly corrosive ones that rain down upon us daily from assorted "experts", lobbyists, single-issue groups, eco warriors, opportunist politicians and so on.
There is rather too much "information" and not enough real knowledge being applied to this debate.
The only observable and uncontestable fact is that the climate changes. Always has and always will. We adapt or die - its what animals do.
What's so hard to understand about this.
There is soooo much more, but I'll save most of those for later. Here's a taste:
— Trees, regarded as shields against global warming because they absorb carbon, were found by German scientists to be major producers of methane, a much more harmful greenhouse gas
— Diesel trains in rural Britain are more polluting than 4x4 vehicles. Douglas Alexander, when Transport Secretary, said: “If ten or fewer people travel in a Sprinter [train], it would be less environmentally damaging to give them each a Land Rover Freelander and tell them to drive”
That's not even discussion worthy.
How much more if you eat the beef, then walk the mile all while stopping every quarter mile to pass a stinky beef fart?
That's not even discussion worthy.
Yeah, nothing but "Junk Science".
"Junk Science 101"- Convenes daily at 6:00 and 11:00 PM EST with your Proffessor Al Gore. Supplementary data availalble on CD by Mr. Mikey Moore.:devil:
The 21st century version of the "World's Flat"........
Somebody better become a vegan mushroom/couch potato. Gotta have someone cover up for MY carbon footprint.
Yesterday I ran 1.5 miles fiirst thing in the AM, along with about 30 other people, Then had a cheeseburger for lunch.
Almost forgot, a couple ounces of beef jerkey to support the system untill lunch too.
Ran another 3 miles (aprox.) yesterday evening, along with a dozen friends, followed by a few cold re-hydrations and a roast beef sandwich.
It was 101 here yesterday, heat index something akin to 106 or 107 if I remember correctly.
Was this supposed to make Smokin think you are smart?
You and Smokin are smarter and more intelligent than Gore? In your dreams.
Science by Smokin and Tex. Now there is a scary thought.
UHHHHHHHH even you are probably "smarter" than the Algore.
Why won't he debate anyone on the subject of global warming?
The guy has never been known for his intellect, check his school transcripts.
He's gotten where he has through his daddy and Armand Hammer. You do know who Armand Hammer was don't you?
BTW Ultra there is a website offering $100,000.00 to anyone tht can prove humans are causing global warming. Maybe you can round up all of the Algores "facts" and win that pot.
Somebody better become a vegan mushroom/couch potato. Gotta have someone cover up for MY carbon footprint.
Yesterday I ran 1.5 miles fiirst thing in the AM, along with about 30 other people, Then had a cheeseburger for lunch.
Almost forgot, a couple ounces of beef jerkey to support the system untill lunch too.
Ran another 3 miles (aprox.) yesterday evening, along with a dozen friends, followed by a few cold re-hydrations and a roast beef sandwich.
It was 101 here yesterday, heat index something akin to 106 or 107 if I remember correctly.
Smokin', you selfish miserable POS...how dare you excercise then brag about it! All those pounds of CO2 and then there's the added expense of extending your life!
All kiddin' aside...it reads as if these environmentals have finally jumped the shark. Time to make some koolaid there fellas!
Good post!
CC
On OPRAH apparently yesterday.:idea:
He said that if we do not stop this now, in 45 years we will all be cooked to death.
The earth will be so hot that we will all be killed, IN 45 YEARS!:jawdrop:
Yea. Uh huh. Sure. You betcha.
He's making more sense every time he opens his mouth.
You STILL believe him, ultra?
I watched a few moments and noticed when her majesty showed a clip from another "expert" with an opposing point of view instead of taking issue with the science he took issue with the funding...how typically lib dem BS!
I honestly don't understand why we can't have a legitimate scientific debate.
CC
Because it's a foregone conclusion. No reason to debate it.
At least, that's what the suporters say.:idea:
Posting Permissions