California pollutes more than Australia....why is it so hard to believe that the other HUGE USA state pollutes more than Canada.

And how the fuck is that an ego boost? That one twisted fuck of a thought. Damn.

Meanwhile California admits it and passes laws to fix the problem. As you can see on this thread, Texas won't admit it and if they do think it's a possiblity, they think it's an ego boost.

This here's the difference, Matt my old pal.

I don't think you can claim to have "fixed" the problem with the results we have seen. I think it is more accurate to say you have passed some laws, but have not produced the results needed to claim victory.

Considering the number of Texas cities (none) on the most polluted list compared to the number of California cities (6 - and 5 of the top 7) on the most polluted list, I'd say Texas isn't the state living in denial here.....

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

Wow Matt the law was passed like a week ago. Can you give us some time to implement it?

There's no denial Matt. We (CA) are one of the top economies in the world as well. Our governator just signed the cap and spend bill to stop the greenhouse gas problem we have. There's no denial in CA.

Yet you fill the car you drive with Texas refined fossil fuel and drive around your beautiful bubble , right?

I think you've inhaled too much of this, hon............

__________________
I sure am glad I was born in America.

Hey Chas, when was y'all's last "rolling blackout"?

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Sam, concerning the a/c running even when no one is home, well, it's actually cheaper that way than it is to come home to a 95 degree house with 95% humidity inside. An a/c would have to run all night to draw that moisture out and cool the house down. Most folks do set their thermostats up before they leave home so their not keeping it at 72 all day and a lot of us have timers on our thermostats, too, that help save energy.

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Yet you fill the car you drive with Texas refined fossil fuel and drive around your beautiful bubble , right?

I think you've inhaled too much beautiful bubble smog, hon............

__________________
I sure am glad I was born in America.

Interesting! California are quite the polluters, so it seems from Mrs. M's list. Though to be honest, WRT Texas, I don't see how Houston skipped out from the most polluted.

What has increased 0.05% per decade is the radiation output.
source




Your right that the graph shows divergence near the end of the century. Perhaps the graph needs to be updated with the data from 2000 to 2005.

A recent article (July, '04) in the BBC says "A new analysis shows that the Sun is more active now than it has been at anytime in the previous 1,000 years."
source
So, this sounds to me like the graph would show a rise in sunspots after 2000.

And thanks for the graph. It sort of shows that there is a correlation between sunspots and temperature.

Of course. But given that the radiation output of the sun has been increasing for almost 3 decades, the sunspot activity is near a 1000 year high, and Mars and Earth are both neighbors of the sun, I think the odds are in favor of the sun as the culprit.


"Changes in temperature precede changes in CO2, with a lag of around 800 years."
source

This says to me that temp changes happen before CO2 changes. And it makes sense to me because as the earth warms, more frozen land is uncovered and hence, more living things are being created which are sources of CO2.

Remember, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas.

And also don't forget that the kyoto protocol would have transfered CO2 production to developing countries which wouldn't have reduced the total CO2 being spewed forth into the atmosphere. In other words, this socialist scheme wouldn't have lowered human caused CO2 levels and if you believe that CO2 causes global warming, then it wouldn't have stopped global warming!
What is ming boggeling is why people can't see through this scheme like I can. I think many of them are still scared by all of the scare tactics that big media and gore have been spewing.

Kramer

Not total irradiance, but irradiance of the minima as this image shows: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/...main_sun5m.jpg

It is also a composite study taking multiple measurement trends and combining them. Other studies based on single measurement trends shown no trend. The same graph above shows that there has been no increasing sunspot trend in the past 5 years.

They are saying the sun is more active on average over this past century compared to the last thousand years. They aren't saying the sun is currently more active. It is pretty much as active as it was 30 years ago.

It does in the early part. It seems to suggest something else is at work, not just solar variation.

The amount solar activity has increased even according to that study is far short of explaining warming observed on earth. Climate models are unable to explain the recent warming using recent solar variation and studies and the current consensus is that solar variation cannot explain the recent warming - http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture05072.html

It could also be the oceans which are the biggest sinks and sources of co2. Colder oceans absorb more co2 wheras warmer oceans emit more into the atmosphere. So heating after a glacial will probably result in lots of co2 being emitted by the oceans.

Well making up about 10% of the greenhouse effect you could call it minor. In the same way you could call the rise in temperature 0.8C last century minor.

A blind comparison of Canada to Texas in terms of emmisions is irrelevant. A better measurement would be lbs. emmisions/$ GNP. If Texas has a lower emmisions per dollar GNP than Canada, then Texas would be "Greener". I'm too lazy too look it up, anyone interested?

I didn't realize that expressing a disdain for regulary meeting people who tell you to your face that they hate you and look down on you simply because of where you come from was just whining.

I thought such discrimination was unacceptable. The irony is too much.

Ummm....so why don't you go and tell the African-American community to stop whining and clean up their act.

__________________
One day, I will sneak across the border into Canada and be an illegal alien. It will be fun.