ALL in the Name of SAVING the PLANET

Well Nucular does have a stigma attached to it, so since we’re in the times of just changing the names of offensive shit to make it acceptable to everyone I say we call it DEI Energy and get busy building reactors.👍
 
Clearly, when it comes to SAVING the PLANET, why would anyone care about pre-historic pup fish that have survived millions of years out in a patch of desert that nobody wants to live in over even visit. I mean, who cares that they can't be found anywhere else in the world or that their very existence is on the brink of extinction if it means we can all drive electric cars, right? Just like the thousands of endangered Desert Tortoise that were euthanized in the name of collecting power from the sun, there are just some things that are just way more important.

I have little doubts that I'm the crazy one here but I personally LOVE the desert. And, if at all possible, I'd really like to put a priority on preserving it and all the creatures that exist within it. That said, I'm not super optimistic that'll happen especially when everyone is going nuts about electric and lithium these days. And, while I typically think that signing petitions and the like do a whole lot of nothing... I'll be honest and say that I broke down and signed this one.
Blue ribbon coalition Cal 4 wheel CORVA all do great work to keep our public lands public. It’s sad they have to. “This land is my land this land is your land. “ No more. It’s all up for grabs if you are a big corporation who wants to put up solar or wind farms. Both of these are destroying landscapes and wildlife. Disgusting.
 
China has a massively higher population than we do, and the global warming impact to their population is/will-be much greater than here. In my opinion, it is good that China is trying things out over there while the US is still mostly debating what to do.
 
China has a massively higher population than we do, and the global warming impact to their population is/will-be much greater than here. In my opinion, it is good that China is trying things out over there while the US is still mostly debating what to do.
How does GLOBAL warming affect a SINGLE group of people more than others? Do you know what a dictionary is?
 
How does GLOBAL warming affect a SINGLE group of people more than others? Do you know what a dictionary is?
It should be very simple to understand this. China has 10.4 times the population in a similar land area. That means we have 10.4x the resources available per person. China is the proverbial canary in a coal mine.

Clearly China believes in global warming or they would not be making such a huge effort to get rid of energy sources which produce CO2 and methane.
 
It should be very simple to understand this. China has 10.4 times the population in a similar land area. That means we have 10.4x the resources available per person. China is the proverbial canary in a coal mine.

Clearly China believes in global warming or they would not be making such a huge effort to get rid of energy sources which produce CO2 and methane.
IMG_0237.jpeg
 
It should be very simple to understand this. China has 10.4 times the population in a similar land area. That means we have 10.4x the resources available per person. China is the proverbial canary in a coal mine.

Clearly China believes in global warming or they would not be making such a huge effort to get rid of energy sources which produce CO2 and methane.
they don't give a shit; they just want the greenies in the USA to like them and sell more solar panels.
 
I didn't realize you believed in that whole global warming thing. Carry on...



View attachment 435667





View attachment 435668
I *do* believe in global warming. It should be obvious to anyone with powers of observation and a brain. The glaciers have been receding world-wide for over 100 years and the evidence is readily available. However, we are still finishing up an ice age so it is unclear how much of the change is due to man. If the glaciers were already receding in Glacier National Park in the 1920s (early in the industrial revolution), is it reasonable to assume that this was already due to the acts of man?
 
I *do* believe in global warming. It should be obvious to anyone with powers of observation and a brain. The glaciers have been receding world-wide for over 100 years and the evidence is readily available. However, we are still finishing up an ice age so it is unclear how much of the change is due to man. If the glaciers were already receding in Glacier National Park in the 1920s (early in the industrial revolution), is it reasonable to assume that this was already due to the acts of man?
My ice is best when frozen in the microwave.

 
I *do* believe in global warming. It should be obvious to anyone with powers of observation and a brain. The glaciers have been receding world-wide for over 100 years and the evidence is readily available. However, we are still finishing up an ice age so it is unclear how much of the change is due to man. If the glaciers were already receding in Glacier National Park in the 1920s (early in the industrial revolution), is it reasonable to assume that this was already due to the acts of man?
Probably leprechauns.
 
Top Bottom