environmental concerns using boat yard paints and other chemicals [Archive]

Jimbo1490

01-19-2008, 01:00 AM

It's good to be concerned about our natural environment. We should be concerned about some particular things, worrisome things. But the trouble is the things we really ought to be worried about are not the same things we are told to worry about. The thing the environmentalists have decided we need to worry about just happen to be the things that will lead to the greatest political power for their movement. THIS SHOULD BOTHER YOU!!This is because the environmental movement has degenerated into a run-of-the-mill political power movement. As with all political movements (including the party or group each of us favors, whichever that is) lies and exaggerations are part of the game.

But at the same time, we live in the information age. We can pretty easily verify or disprove whatever a pundit says. It's up to us to educate ourselves as to what is really happening and what we should and should NOT worry about.

Jimbo

the1much

01-19-2008, 08:25 AM

ya the gov. has selective sight,,,,they'll tell us our paint kills the air,,but then give tax breaks to companies that produce enough "killing" agents ta kill 4 planets.,,,,,Grady,,thats another thing you'll notice FAST,,specially here in west texas,,,it freakin STINKS here,,all these flares from the oil and gas companies,,i had a headache for 3 years down here :(

Kaptin-Jer

01-19-2008, 01:30 PM

Gentlemen the government has to step in, because people like us put our concerns first. Money, convenience--all self interests. I ground off my bottom paint and hosed it into the channel, because it was easy---, and after a few hundred other guys like me did that we were wondering why there were no more fish around the marina. What does one Awl grip spray job mean? not much, but a few hundred jobs mean a lot, so yes the Government does need to get involved to stop people like me who are amateurs and only spray or grind once a year, but have the attitude that once doesn't matter. Can't tell you how many times I have said that---I need to be watched.

the1much

01-19-2008, 01:43 PM

ya on that kapt.,,but it also needs to be said that "green" people are'nt the gov.,,most the time it takes "those" people hollering and screaming just to get the gov. to look. then when they save "something" they wanna say they did it in our interest.,, you would think between all us here we could gather enough brain cells ( i got 1 fer the cause heh) togather to tell ourselves ( man dumba**,,do it the right way) ,,but we dont,,i guess you can just call me LAZY,,i want everything saved, fixed, alive,,,,but i get up in the morning and start my "convenient" life again, and look at my kids SRAIGHT in their eyes and tell them i LOVE em,,,,,but,,i then turn around and do my part in making sure that their kids DONT have clean air to breathe,,see's pictures of animals,,and daydream about how it musta been to be out on a sail boat, look in the blue'ish-green water, and hear grampa jim tyhrough his oxygen mask tell them what "fishing" was like.

Jimbo1490

01-19-2008, 03:38 PM

Much,

You've hit on an important point: most of the time, it's environmental pressure groups that wind up making policy by squawking loudly or more recently suing the government to FORCE it to enact policies that they KNOW could NEVER be enacted in the proper venue, our elected state and federal legislatures.

This was exactly what happened with the spotted owl, and it continues to happen with the spotted owl and other species. Even after it has been conclusively proven that the 'spotted owl' is simply a variety of the 'Common Owl', environmentalists have moved on to other species, making false and misleading claims as to their rarity to among other things stop ALL logging on federal lands. Keep in mind that forests on government owned lands are maturing approximately 9 billion board feet of harvestable lumber annually, while we actually harvest less than 1 billion board feet from those same forests. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this constant surplus of wood coupled with the 'put out every fire' policy is a recipe for a major wildfire disaster. This is piss-poor forest management, but is what we get when we let special interest groups like these manage public policy by litigation instead of letting the legitimate policymakers that we have elected do so.

And then these same green wackos will tell you that we have to worry about de-forestation in the US while we have actually been RE-foresting for about a century, now :p

the1much

01-19-2008, 03:50 PM

half my family are loggers ( the otha half fishermen) and i've seen first hand what the gov. says you have to do when logging, and what you HAVE to do after,,( and MOST all people against logging is against CLEAR cutting,,not "logging") and the after effects are devastating,,in place of 1000 acres of trees,, in 5 years its full od rasberry stickers,,,,which only helps very FEW animals,, specially when theres a patch every few acres.,,thats the government standards ,,,the "wackos" want it replaced with more TREES,,,,,and the spotted owl is just 1 instance , how many "instances" has the gov. done nothing and now its too late?,, jimbo you seem awful worried that everyones lying,,,,well they are,,both sides,,,but as i've said before,,,i'd drather side on being OVER CAREFUL,,then under estimate the problem until its only a memory .

Jimbo1490

01-19-2008, 05:11 PM

Jim, We are not running out of forest! Even if we agree that clearcutting is bad (I don't like it; I like the way the Canadians do it) , it all grows back as a functional forest in 20 years! Why even mention a 5 year span? The environmentalists insist that it takes CENTURIES for a forest to grow back; no serious scientists says it takes longer than 50-70 years. What do you think happens in a wildfire? Why do you give (mostly preventable) natural disaster (forest fire) a pass? Why is it OK to 'let it burn' rather than harvest? Who benefits from that policy?

the1much

01-19-2008, 06:06 PM

after a burn,,there is growth,,a burn gives the ground nutrients ,, clear cutting erodes the ground,and in place of trees you have small ground brush that grown at 20 times the rate of trees, which in turn chokes the trees out and keeps light from getting to the tree. the Canadians come over HERE to do most of their logging now,,,,why,,,,because the canadian government wants, and knows that forests brings money. and YES we are running out of forests,,i can give you numbers that would boggle a mind,,but then you revert to,,its all lies,, whoever dont agree with YOUR numbers is a lier. why doesnt florida have pollution? cause wind blows,, look at maine,, it has the 3rd lowest industrial production plants then other states,,we should have almost PURE air there shouldnt we??,,but,,it has one of the 5th highest air pollution,,why?,,because the wind comes from the west and south ,,,and where does them west southerners pollution go?? to maine. so as you BRAG ( about something you have NO idea about, unless of course you have the instruments and the knowledge to use em ) about florida has NO air pollution,,i want ta shoot the people that are KILLING my kids and bragging bout it. but then i have to say,,well,it takes all kinds ;)
oh,,,,and i can show you pics of a place that was cut before i was born,,and 40 years later,,its a brush pile,,i see no FUNCTION in that,,,,now times it by,,,oh say a million acres,,,in fact google earth any of the numbers of papermill land in maine,,take a look,,then tell me that last post again

Jimbo1490

01-20-2008, 01:30 AM

Much,
You can't seem to talk rationally about this subject without going off into a tirade. Now stop attacking me and address my points of argument!

The thing is there's no scientific data to back up what you're saying.

First off, logging and the timber industry have LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO with deforestation in the US, and hardly anywhere else for that matter. The harm that the loggers did was to cut down our 'heritage' forests with the big majestic trees. Now THOSE trees take centuries to re-grow. But a forest does not need those trees to function as a forest. We DO want to save those trees out of appreciation for their beauty.

As I said, deforestation cannot be blamed on logging. Deforestation ALWAYS comes from land clearing for the purpose of FARMING (except tree farming, of course:D ), mostly corn and wheat farming. And the adoption of modern high-yield farming methods is the reason we have been RE-foresting for a century, NOT because we banned logging in the mid 80's :rolleyes:

We can grow the same food on an acre that it used to take anywhere from 4 to 10 acres back in the 19th century. This has allowed us to idle vast areas of farm land, which in turn returns to forest. We see it all around central Florida; forests with big pines and oaks but also rows of orange trees in the undergrowth. 25 years ago these were active orange groves. Yet we still grow most of the citrus in the USA.

And guess who's vehemently opposed to high-yield farming methods? You gueed right if you said " the green wackos" Round two is well under way as they try to get a ban on GM crops, which if adopted will help Asia and Africa re-forest, too.

The basic message of the green wackos is that industry and technology is what is ruining the environment, but the reality is that all the REAL environmental progress (And there has been TREMENDOUS progress) happens BECAUSE of advances in industry and technology.

And on air quality: both the US and Europe have cleaner air than they have at any time in the last 100 years (and not just Florida). There are a few bad spots, like the valleys of CA and Houston to name two, but on the whole this is true. This despite tremendous population growth and the abundance of electricity and transportation powered by cheap fossil fuels.

PAR

01-20-2008, 03:35 AM

I lived in LA for a while many years ago and it was a common joke in town that you can't see above the 13th floor. Businesses even took the name in various alterations for themselves. You can now see above the 13th floor downtown as the smog, which is still bad is clearly much better since the California Clean Air Act was enforced. Yes, it made cars more expensive, but it also forced the manufactures to build a better product, which resulted in computer controls.

I remember changing spark plugs ever 10,000 miles, doing valve jobs after 30,000 on my bikes, setting points and replacing wires. These where the things that just had to be done. Now you can put 250,000 miles on a car, while it still wears it's original distributor cap, plugs and wires. This is the direct descendant of an evolution caused by the manufactures being forced to "up grade" for the sake of the tree huggers.

The US Clean Air Act was passed in 1964, which started the ball rolling. The entire area west of the Rockies, would have been cut clean of trees (just like east of the Mississippi), if it were not for a notorious tree hugger who happened to luck into the presidency (literally) and now has his mug carved into Mt. Rushmore.

Everyone well understands that the government wouldn't willingly permit poisons to be spilled in our waterways, soil or air, nor that business wouldn't short cut safety issues to pocket a buck. It has never been found that a business or government would cover up a mistake or short change the tax payer or hide vital information from the people, now has it. Our fine upstanding government officials and business executives would never knowingly piss on our back and tell us it raining.

We need regulation because they do piss on our backs. They have buried mega tons of poisons in the soil, air and waterways and lied about it.

This country owes its very existence, to these simple truths about powerful and/or wealthy people. The freedoms we enjoy and well take for granted, are a direct result of our unwillingness as a society to tolerate continued abuses of the few.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government"

From the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. It is our unwavering right to stand not for the injustices of the realms we've asked to tolerate, but to fight hard against it. The whinny and complaining among us in the mid 18th century were the "loyalists" of the day and they were booted out along with their red coated brothers by 1781. The nay sayers of the day were the "radicals" or insurgents and tree huggers of the era and though no one thought they had a chance, over coming and forcing change was to be.

This has always been the case in regard to insurgencies. They always win, because you're not fighting an infrastructure, but a concept. Historically, this has been the case. We didn't catch Poncho Villa, we haven't caught Osama, we couldn't bring down North Vietnam, the British haven't changed the minds of the Irish, etc. You can break the body, but the spirit remains.

We've struggled though several near collapses of our own government as a result of goverenment or business policies, once requiring nearly a half a million brothers to take death to each other.

Woman wouldn't be allowed to vote, nor would anyone who didn't own land or who wasn't white, if it weren't for the people's right to insist on accountability from government and business. Children would still be in factories tolling 14 hour days, the police would round up the "usual suspects" and beat a confession out of them, men would go unrepresented at trial, and countless other issues would not have been addressed had it not been for intervention on the peoples behalf or plane old rioting by the people.

I will always hold, "We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends." to heart.

From the second to last paragraph of the afore mentioned literary work.

Kaptin-Jer

01-20-2008, 08:25 AM

The operable word is accountability. If we were all accountable the Government would never have to get involved, but like I said before we, are mostly self indulgent, and only look at the greater good when we are forced to do so. I believe one of the problems with environmental issues is that many are not evident. It is difficult to see global warming, the fish kills are very slow in developing. It is not the same as running a red light (another government regulation) the results are not as immediate, but in the end the same result. So I believe that the "tree huggers" do serve their purpose, and government , in the most part, serves to make us all accountable.

the1much

01-20-2008, 09:21 AM

um.....there is no farming of any siaze in the northeast,,im not attacking you a bit,jimbo,why do you seem to want to make into attacking you,,,is it because everything you have to say has NO backing,, no data,,and no numbers to back up what your saying?,,i havent once "attacked" you,,and yet when you sit there and type things you have NO proof of , and i remark on it,,im attacking,,,,,,seems like that EXCUSE is wearing itself out,,if i was "attacking" you,,,you WOULD know it,ya know, it seems to me that when someone isdumping sludge in the middle of the night,,and them tree huggers are screaming about it,,,that big company usually starts out saying,,,what is it,,,ooo,," their attacking us for no reason",,,,,sound familiar? ,and i would make it VERY clear that i was attacking you ;)
show me 1 picture of farm land turned back to a forest??????
and do you know why we farm more product from 1 acre of land now??its because most farming in the usa is corn and wheat,,which has been genetically altered to produce more ( worse quality) corn ,,and now that 1000 acre farm is STILL 1000 acres of farm land,,but now they get twice the corn syrup out of it,,,,o,,,thats right,,what does most of that "farm land" produce,,,,corn syrup,,for our "sweet" tooth,,,85% of ALL corn grown is for sweetner,,,,not for our food consumtion,,,just to make our food sweeter.
and NO jimbo,, green wackos aint against progress or big businesses,,there against killing ourselves to get it. now tell me how ive "attacked" you,,,then show us where you get your info,,,as ive stated before,,i can give ya first hand experience, from being in the fishing and logging industry,, then i can give ya pics,,and i can give ya the #'s on all that straight from our loving government ;)
and im waiting for that "proof" that an over populated place like Florida, has NO air pollution.

the1much

01-20-2008, 02:32 PM

and P.S.
i aint a green wacko,tree hugger,,,,,,yes im a hippie ;) but i blame that on the "fumes" i'm only stating things i've seen first hand,,an observation,,,and its VERY hard to tell me the i cant see something thats standing right in front of me.,,i'm confused on how you can read what i've said,,things i've spent my life doing for over 30 years,, things i've seen EVERY day,, things i've done, and tell me the exact opposite is the truth. i dont say i KNOW things, unless i KNOW.it doesnt mean i dont like you, it doesnt mean i do,the only thing it means is we disagree on a subject. maybe its time for more math,,,with my shoes off and using my daughters fingers, i've seen that we agree on most things,,,so dont take me so "personal",,its politics,,,and i dont even vote,,so i dont waste my time trying to "change" anyones mind or choice,,i really dont care what your "politics" are,,,,but im also not going to sit there and say nothing when YOU attack people that "care" for you,me,my children,and all the rest of "us" and them people are doing "their" bit and things they "believe" in.
i'm real sorry you take "it" so personal,,,but on the other hand,, i really dont care what ya think,,but people that "care" for my children, are considered my "family" and well,, im a yankee hippie, that really dont care what people think bout me,,but there will be NO attacking MY family without getting some "mouth" from me.,,,so from now on,,tell me what you "know" not here say,derilic propaganda,give me FACTS,,
Thank-You
Your "happy hippie" Jim

Jimbo1490

01-21-2008, 09:58 PM

The clean air act as amended is probably the crowning jewel of the environmental movement. I have so stated in another thread some months ago. That act addressed a specific group of problems concerning air quality and has mostly achieved its objectives; our air quality has, for the most part returned to levels not seen in at least 100 years. In the UK (different country, different legislation, I know), the return has been to air quality not seen in some 500 years. Not that our air was dirtier then theirs recently, but that theirs has been badly polluted for centuries, long before the industrial age.

Nor is this thread about attacking the ideas behind the environmental movement, at least not the ideas that spawned that movement and made it appeal to the mainstream, nor to attack its successes.

Indeed, the problems with the most recent permutation of that movement stem from the fact that it has largely been successful in reaching most of the goals that were set, and has since suffered a certain 'lack of cause', so to speak. The cleaner and more sustainable our existence becomes, the more we hear that we are in a 'crisis', which when viewed from a purely technical perspective, is puzzling. But this sort of unreasonable shrillness is the stock and trade of the environmental extremists that have hijacked that movement.

Simultaneously, the taste of the powers gained early on is addictive, and the leadership in the movement has regrettably fallen into a lust for power, wherein junk science scaremongering (Menken's hobgoblins) is the standard motivational tool plied upon the populations of the democratic countries in which environmental advocacy groups operate.

The bottom line to all of this is that since the environmental advocacy groups have unquestionably thrown their hats into the ring political, it is incumbent upon us to treat them accordingly, as the politicians they have morphed into, and to demand no less honesty from them than we do from politicians of other stripes. This is the one and only way that they can remain useful to us. This honesty must apply no less to technical matters than any other, especially as the leaders of the movement so often present the appearance of resting their positions upon scientific data.

"The environmental movement really, it is a political activist movement, and they have become hugely influential at a global level and every politician is aware of that today....

I think one of the most pernicious aspects of the environmental movement is this romanticism of peasant life, and the idea that industrial societies are the destroyers of the world...

The environmental movement has evolved into the strongest force there is for preventing development in the developing countries, I think it is legitimate for me to call them anti-human.

The shift to climate being a major focal point came about for two very distinct reasons: the first reason was because by the mid 80's the majority of people now agreed with all of the reasonable things we in the environmental movement were saying they should do. Now when a majority of people agree with you it's pretty hard to remain confrontational with them, and so the only way to remain anti-establishment was to adopt ever more extreme positions...

The other reason that environmental extremism emerged was because world communism failed, the [Berlin] wall came down, and a lot of 'peacenicks' and political activists moved into the environmental movement bringing their 'neo-marxism' with them, and learned to use green language in a clever way to cloak agendas that actually have more to do with ant-capitalism and anti-globalization than they do anything with ecology and science."

Patrick Moore
Environmental activist, co founder of "Greenpeace"

The leaders of any political movement are still human, with all of the foibles of humans. Politicians of one denomination are NOT inherently more honest than those of any other, or for that matter than a high government official or the leadership of a large corporation. They will use deception to achieve their goals if they believe they can get away with it. This fact is especially disturbing when the acquisition of power becomes the main goal as it always is in politics. It's up to us to prevent them getting away with it!

the1much

01-21-2008, 10:11 PM

sounds like a guy who got kicked out heh
In his OWN words
Jim Robinson
Father,friend

Jimbo1490

01-21-2008, 10:28 PM

Much,

There is so much data everywhere on this subject of reforestation and high-yield farming. If you have seen my posts on the global warming thread you would know that I am capable of backing up eveything that I have posted. But this one is so well understood and documented it's just too easy. Do a little research yourself.

Here, I'll help you get started:

http://www.highyieldconservation.org/
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21821
http://www.cgfi.org/2007/05/31/world-wide-forests-expanding-aided-by-high-yield-farming/

Much, the following is an example of a personal attack by you:

"so as you BRAG ( about something you have NO idea about, unless of course you have the instruments and the knowledge to use em ) about florida has NO air pollution,,i want ta shoot the people that are KILLING my kids and bragging bout it. but then i have to say,,well,it takes all kinds "

I have a thick enough skin, don't worry about my feelings:p But the thread is not served by these attacks. Try to just stick with the facts. I never made any brag about FL's air pollution, juat a statement of fact. You are once again reading something into the post that IS JUST NOT THERE! OF COURSE wind currents play a key role in air pollution. That's why the valleys of CA stay so polluted. And that's also why it MAKES NO SENSE to try to apply CA solutions to other areas that do not have a geo-climatic situation like CA's.

I'm extra busy at work this week, so I haven't had the usual amount time to read and post.

the1much

01-21-2008, 10:49 PM

hehe,,well theres also alot of data backing my comments
and if you took that as a personal attack,,,,then you musta been bragging,,,,you sound like a man scorned,,,,,,didnt get the girls in greenpeace aye??<that is personal ;)
and im alwaYz extra busy,,,but take the time outta my day for comedic relief,,,,Thank-You

Jimbo1490

01-21-2008, 10:54 PM

Jim,

The simplest way I can show you FL has no air pollution is to show you the EPA's list of current and former 'non-attainment zones'.

http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/onc.html

If you search the list, you will discover that no FL city or area is listed. I know these gov't websites are not the simplest to navigate in, but if you look around you can see what I've been talking about, though the info comes piecemeal, not as a summary anywhere I can find. The time period covered is 1995-2005.

Now on the FDEP website I found graphs of ozone and particulates that showed that FL's pollution levels have been dropping since 1980 despite prodigious population growth and that FL did indeed just tip into non-attainment (of federal air quality standards) circa 1988-89, the years of the bad wildfires.

Jimbo1490

01-21-2008, 11:22 PM

Jimbo1490

01-21-2008, 11:35 PM

Much,

Here you go again:rolleyes: A fellow who is fairly authoratative on the subject, Patrick Moore, makes statements that you apparently don't like. Do you refute the statements? Do you present facts of your own?

No, of course not. You attack him personally: "sounds like a guy who got kicked out heh"

Whenever you are about to hit the 'submit post' button, ask yourself if your post contains any FACTS, and if it is short on facts in a thread that needs facts, refrain from posting for a change :D

the1much

01-22-2008, 08:15 AM

you just proved what i said,,,,thank-you
as you see,,,florida DOES have air pollution,,jus cause its dropping,,doesnt mean there ISNT any
again thank -you
and no i dont refuse true statements,,,i dont accept propaganda from a scorned man like patrick,,,,why dont you tell us the story of patrick,,and i didnt "attack" patty,,i made an observation,,it seems to again that if I dont agree ,,you take it as attcking,,,,do ya think the C.I.A is watching us too? aliens taking over the earth maybe?
propaganda has been used in every war,,every agument between the government and "groups" and that propaganda is from BOTH sides.
but as stated above,,thank-you for proving my point ;)
and ALL my posts are full of FACTS,,,the simplest way ta see that is,,,um,,,OPEN ya eyes
and you think some moron like patrick is an authority?,,jus cause you write something,,join a club,,then get kicked out,,then write something against them, doesnt mean its true. show us the things patrick wrote like before his um,,,departure ;)
as you read all that,,it seems he's saying the exact opposite,,hmm,,,so im pose to take the "word" of a dude that has written and made speech's that are totally the opposite that he now writes...... sounds like a circle jerk to me

the1much

01-22-2008, 08:28 AM

For everyone's perusal:

"Two years ago in Britain, the Cooperative Wholesale Association, which farms both organically and conventionally, said they get 44% less wheat per acre from their organic fields. If that's the right number, Europe -- to feed itself, not to export, just to feed itself today -- would need additional crop land equal to all of the forest area in Germany, France, Denmark, and the UK," said Dennis Avery, director of the Center for Global Food Issues. Added Dr. Borlaug, "We aren't going to feed 6 billion people with organic fertilizer. If we tried to do it, we would level most of our forest and many of those lands would be productive only for a short period of time."
thats why we trade with other nations,,to get what we cant grow or make,,and to give what we can,,and what is made with most of that wheat??and our nations biggest crop,,millions of acres of un-eatable corn,for what?,,,now take that useless corn and grow something we can EAT,,hmmm,, sound like "common sense"
and what did those people do before they had all that wheat? and if they didnt have wheat they would die? starve?
hehehe use some sense,,most of "our" food ends up in twinkies and third world countries,,,,oo,,,,our nations 3rd crop,,,,,rice,,guess where that goes?
1 more thingy,,,all our exhaust from cars, industrial "chimneys" where does all that go? out into space never to bother us again?or do we believe "just a little aint nothing,, theres so much air that its "watered" down and is no prob.,,,,,,well air comes from what? common we all know,,,,,o ya,,trees,,,,we now have like 5% of the trees we had 1000 years ago,, so that means less air being made,,but industry has become more and BIGGER,, and the chemicles worse,,,,,,,,how many drops of water coloring (poison) in a pool does it take to turn the water a different color,,1 drop,,,nope,,,no change, 2 drops,,nope still no change,,,3?4? nope no change,,,o.k. people,,,we can all put water coloring in,,it doesnt do a thing to the water.,,,,,,what happens after 300 people and 10,000 drops,,,,,hmmmm,,,the water doesnt seem the same color it was originally :(

the1much

01-22-2008, 11:34 AM

wells off today to the oilfield,,where they dump oil on the ground ( even tho our government says its illegal and doesnt happen that often) i just love standing next to the "gas" flares splurting out H2S gas,, and we all know how good that is for our air,,,we have to have detectors attached to us "jus in case" the wind blows down instead of away,,cause unlike any harmful to our environment, if ya get 1 breathe of this stuff it kills ya instantly ;)

Jimbo1490

01-22-2008, 04:41 PM

Much,

My exact word were: "Florida has no air pollution problem. Never has, never will." Notice the word "problem" indicating pollution that is above acceptable levels. Florida has no air pollution that is above acceptable levels. That is all that can be said about any place. Note that there is always some pollution, even at the top of a 'pristine' mountain, and small amounts of pollutants have been there for centuries. The natural world makes pollution, too. Pollutants that can sicken and kill, just like anthropogenic pollutants.

the1much

01-22-2008, 05:58 PM

http://www.scorecard.org/env-releases/hap/state.tcl?fips_state_code=12#maps
http://www.weather.gov/aq/sectors/florida.php
http://www.epa.gov/enviro/
http://www.city-data.com/forum/florida/114737-florida-s-air-pollution.html
now tell me theres no prob,,,,,but keep ya eyes closed
and P.S. we had a oil waste facility break down and have an oil spill of a few 10,000 barrels or so,,,,im scheduled to go help tonight and only home a few hours to get some rest,,and we know this wont harm nothing :(

Jimbo1490

01-22-2008, 07:21 PM

[QUOTE=the1much;181043]http://www.scorecard.org/env-releases/hap/state.tcl?fips_state_code=12#maps

Much, this first site is just the opinions of an advocacy group.They are not assessing 'pollution' AT ALL, but rather a nebulous model of 'exposure' to which they (wisely) apply the following 'caveats':

1996 EXPOSURE ESTIMATES MAY NOT ACCURATELY PREDICT CURRENT EXPOSURES

EXPOSURE MODELING IS UNCERTAIN

HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT ALSO INVOLVES IMPORTANT UNCERTAINTIES

http://www.weather.gov/aq/sectors/florida.php

Anyone looking at the map on this page can verify for themselves exactly what I have said; that Florida does not have an air pollution problem, not even in its populous areas. The highest number on the map I can find is 50, while a reading of 80 or more PPB is considered 'non-attainment' of federal air quality standards, according to the Clean Air Act, as amended. Note that one of the 50's is quite a few miles offshore in the Gulf of Mexico and also offshore in the Atlantic:D

http://www.epa.gov/enviro/

Can't figure out what you are featuring with this site:?:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/florida/114737-florida-s-air-pollution.html

There's absolutely nothing on this page that says Florida's air is polluted, only that Florida gets most of it's electricity from burning fossil fuel, a statement which is true of every region of the world except possibly France, which is mostly nuclear. So ya wanna go nuclear?:D

Godspeed cleaning up that spill. Coastal and estuarine pollution is a key area
where we are NOT making progress. Coupled with overfishing, especially in and from Asian countries, this is a REAL environmental threat, rather than a bogeyman.

the1much

01-23-2008, 01:16 PM

the site is almost cleaned up,,jus got back,,,the oil so far has only gotten bout 2 foot penetration into the dirt,,,hopefully none makes it to the aquifer,,,,
jimbo,, how many times in the last 10 years has the government raised their "tolerable" level,,,once,,,twice,,,,more?,,,,and isnt ANY pollution bad?and as i've said,,and the government says,,all that pollution moves,,usually ( unless REALLY bad) to the north east,,where THEY deal with YOUR pollution,,,,well mine too since im down here now ;),,,and deal with OUR acid rain,,which messes with the water,,plant life,,and our aquifers.
well ive been awake for 30 something hours,,and got starters to fix, and a glass job on a small (wanna-be) boat,,,,,
1 more thingy,,,,we ALL know what the gov.says,,,and what they say is SAFE for us,,,,,like red-lead paint, nuclear waste is safely put away,,how much chlorine in our water from the paper mills,,all those drugs that help our weight and all our ailments,,no,,,wait,,,they've changed their minds again,,red lead aint safe,,to much chlorine kills our streams,,,no wait, that pill will end up killing ya, not help ya,,,
i find it hard to put ANY confidence in ANYONE that changes their minds on whats safe every year,,,but you can trust em,,,im pretty sure your air is as pure as 100 years ago. and as discovery channel says,,,1000 years ago their was 18 billion acres of forest,,today less then 5 billion, and predicted in 25 more years we'll be down to less then 2,,,,,,,sounds like that "forest" program the gov. has started(20 years ago) is doing great huh?

Jimbo1490

01-23-2008, 06:46 PM

Much, every 5 years the government makes amendments to the Clean Air Act. There have never once been any relaxing of clean air standards during these amendments. To the contrary, they have consistently gotten stricter.

You should check out the latest research on acid rain, too. Once they got rid of >90% of the pollutants which were believed completely responsible for acid rain, everone thought it should go away. But guess what? It didn't. Turns out acid rain is mostly a natural phenomena, somewhat aggravated by man-made pollutants.

http://www.cityu.edu.hk/HKMetS/acid_guide.htm

This is just one quick link I found, there are bound to be more comprehensive explanations out there, but you get the idea.

All pollution is bad for you and in an ideal world, we could all breath 100% pure air, free of all contaminants. But you have to acknowledge that there are natural 'background', levels of just about any pollutant; it's not a perfect world. Once you have returned the natural environment to those background levels, it is just silly to waste effort and money to attempt to reduce pollution any further than that as you'll never do it! In many key areas, that's where we are today.

the1much

01-24-2008, 09:37 AM

Much, every 5 years the government makes amendments to the Clean Air Act. There have never once been any relaxing of clean air standards during these amendments. To the contrary, they have consistently gotten stricter.

exactly,,,hehe,,and why do they do that?? so today your map showing 50 isnt bad,,,but next year 50 will mean bad because why? they figured out AGAIN that oo we was wrong,,,only this much is bad,,not the level we said last year.
and YES theres bad stuff NATURALLY comming out of the earth,,but the earth had its way of taking care of that,,like TREES, swamp land,and jus air,,but as we have saturated all the NATURAL answers to the problem,,it (the earth) cant deal with it.
and comming from a state that has 1 of the highest counts of acid rain because of idiots to the west and south of maine, i see it as a HUGE problem,,and yes,,it happens naturally, but we agravated it and made it WAY worse. and jimbo, you seem to really have faith in a government that makes more money when these industries make more money.,,would you take my word that the green stuff i'm letting some company dump is o.k for ya,,,specially if you found out i had a financial interest in that company?
and ya hit it on the head as i've been saying all along,,
>
You should check out the latest research on acid rain, too. Once they got rid of >90% of the pollutants which were believed completely responsible for acid rain, everone thought it should go away. But guess what? It didn't. Turns out acid rain is mostly a natural phenomena, somewhat aggravated by man-made pollutants.

ya what the government THOUGHT,,but oo,,,they've changed their mind again,,now since they dont know WHAT causes it ( actually they play dumb pretty well huh) they try to say its natural,,,,,hmmm 20 years ago acid rain wasnt a QUARTER as high as it is today,,,and that "90%" is from the HIGHEST level ever recorded.,,,,,1 time it took me 8 rolls of paper to sand a boat,,the last boat took me 2,,,,does that mean i'm that much better now?,, or does it mean i dont do as good of a sanding job now?, or does it mean that 1 boat was really unfair? or maybe it was just cheaper paper?,,,,does this now mean i can tell people im 70% better then what i was? or do i do the same kind of work but say that to make it SEEM im so much better?
wells all of ta work till break 1 hehe
heres a BIG tree hug from muchy ;)

Jimbo1490

01-24-2008, 06:09 PM

the1much

01-24-2008, 06:38 PM

Less pollution + cleaner air = more acid rain. Therefore, acid rain mostly natural, just like I said. Dirt cores show acid rain was a problem a long timae ago, long before large scale industrial emissions, which are mostly gone now anyway. How do you explain that?
less pollution? since when,,,what we have less then 2 years ago? how bout 50 years ago? less then we had 100 years ago?
and cleaner air? since when,,,??last year? woooopie,,,,how much higher ia acid rain,air pollution,and just plain ole garbage filled swamp land?? and yes SOME acid rain happens naturally,,,and if you could read what is written now what ya wanna see, if ya payed attention in science class, and read my previous post,,,,the earth took care of it NATURALLY,,but since we ADDED to it and made it worse, it is NOW and has been a problem the last 50 years,,it only dropped in the last 6 years,,but dropped from its HIGHEST point 10 years AGO.
explain to us who have eyes we see with and common sense from what year and point did pollution drop????

Jimbo1490

01-24-2008, 10:00 PM

You need to get a grip, dude! Pollution has been dropping for about a century and especially since the 1950's. There are numerous books and white papers that have been published detailing it for you. It's just that the only thing you seem to trust is the green wackos and they will NEVER tell you that pollution levels are falling, NO MATTER WHAT! That would be like a labor union leader saying "Well, wages are high enough and working conditions are just jim-dandy, so I think we'll just disband the union and go home." No matter what objective scientists say, whether they are funded by the gov't, or a university or WHATEVER, the green wackos have a vested interested in keeping people WORRIED SICK that the world is falling down around them! Now if they were really honest in their beliefs, they would at least try to goad us all into worrying about those things that really are of pressing need. But they don't do that because those things don't lead to the most political gains. The environment is just the vehicle, not the destination. And thus my disenchantment with the movement.

the1much

01-24-2008, 10:18 PM

and your "theory" is based on a "BUSINESS" (government), to police itself on what it "allows" and "sees" and says is "acceptable" amounts,of "whatever" for the "person" (every employer business,and tax payer) that GIVES them MONEY under DURESS with NO choice. and the more MONEY that "person" makes,,that government"THAT BIG BUSINESS" makes.,,,and you think i'm
and sorry jimbo,,,,but history has proven over and over,and OVER,,,all planets come to an end sooner or later,,,,i'd just like to see it later. but if you need the comfort of a hug,,,,and whispered sweet nuffinf,,"like dont worry,,it will never end,,,,we make the world a better place EVERY day,,,,every day we make things that if there was jus 1 mishap,,,or if people "actually" knew,,but dont worry sweety,,,,everything will be here as long as people like you care,,and so what if 100 years from now its worse,,,i'll be dead,,"
,,,,isnt that jus a sweet lullaby,:)
good night sunshine :)

PAR

01-25-2008, 08:52 PM

After artfully applying the 19 letters it takes (cursive usually), to spell out my full given name in the fleshly laid snow, I usually am more then satisfied in the exclamation and prefer not to play in the yellow stuff, but head back inside for another round of beers, next to the comfort of the fire.

the1much

01-25-2008, 09:41 PM

i miss my wood stove :( ,,they aint got nuff trees here to have one :(
man they jus seem ta heat ya from the inside ;)

longliner45

01-25-2008, 09:46 PM

wait, wait,,, wait is par complaing about the cold?,,,,,oh happy day,,, longliner

PAR

01-26-2008, 12:10 AM

It's getting nasty tonight, down into the 40's for the third night in a row. We'll get back into the 70's by Monday, with lows in the 50's which is cold but I have a coat.

I wasn't complaining about the cold (but since you brought it up) I was referring to the pissing contest that has been going on here, John.

Kaptin-Jer

01-26-2008, 06:46 AM

Hi Paul,
I set this thread up just for these two. They started back in another thread. They both have good points and I am sure they will eventually agree to disagree. --Wrong about the weather, it is going to be a perfect weekend for messing about on boats down here.

the1much

01-26-2008, 08:31 AM

shoot,,,it got down ta 20 here 1 night,stayed in the 30's then another night of 20's,,,,now we back to that GREAT global warmin,,,hehehe,,,in the 60's ;) ,,,,i LUV texas in the winter,,,,,,wells cept fer puttin up with cowBOYS and red-neck imposters ;)
man i didnt know this many stupid people could live so close togather and not accidently all forget ta breathe 1 day,,,,they have daily reminders on the news several times a day,,,"remember everyone,,,,we dont have "common" sense, or more then 3 brain cells,,, so we ALL need to remember to BREATHE,,if we hold our breathes,,,we could die,,so,,,innnnn,,,,ooouuuuttttt,,,,"
hehehe,,their a little "simple" here ;)

the1much

01-26-2008, 08:43 AM

hehehehehe,,,,,,i wasnt having a P,P, contest,,,,hahahhaa,,,,,ya need to look at it as i won the minute he said he gets a "dust free" paint job in florida outside on the tar mac,,,,,so from that comment on,,,,,look at it as,,," an old codger hippie,,,,getting the laugh of his life,,and jus stringing jimbo along for the daily "holding my gut laughing" comedy relief" heheheh,,,,my kids are getting boring ;)
hahha even my ole lady every night says,,what that,,,ummm,,,(id say that that would be "attacking heh") have to say today,,,,has he said them rooftop gardend on them high rises in new york are "reforestation" yet? " hahaha
so i figure since he so easy,,,and needs that "daily reminder" it keeps me from picking on my kids ;)
AND YOU P P YELLOW?,,,,,,no wonder people look at my name in the snow funny,,,,i picked the wrong color ;)