One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Al Gore: 'It's Getting Colder Because It's Getting Warmer'
Page <<first <prev 23 of 64 next> last>>
Jan 10, 2018 13:11:11   #
S. Maturin
 
Morgan wrote:
Trump along with his newly appointed Head of the EPA Scott Pruitt has...

Allowed a dangerous pesticide to stay on the market, despite it being a threat to children’s health. Chlorpyrifos a common agricultural pesticide that causes neurological harm in children exposed in utero. In 2016, the EPA’s scientists concluded that the agency should ban chlorpyrifos after finding unsafe levels of the chemical on apples, peaches, oranges, strawberries, and other fruits. Dow Chemical, one of the largest producers of products using this chemical, gave $1 million to President Trump’s inauguration committee and leads a presidential advisory committee on manufacturing. On March 28, Trump’s EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt rejected the findings of the agency’s scientists, denied a petition to ban the chemical, and delayed further action until 2022
Trump along with his newly appointed Head of the E... (show quote)


That famous chicken must have known something-- THE SKY IS, INDEED, FALLING! We're all gonna die!!

ARMAGEDDON! Sez Nancy.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 13:14:24   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
I hate dangerous pesticides, but I would hate not having enough food worse. So far all I see is the usual whining and scare tactics.
S. Maturin wrote:
That famous chicken must have known something-- THE SKY IS, INDEED, FALLING! We're all gonna die!!

ARMAGEDDON! Sez Nancy.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 13:32:52   #
S. Maturin
 
JFlorio wrote:
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/the-facts-on-chlorpyrifos/


That was/is a good reference. However, it is shot through with holes.

Whenever we see in print references such as "high levels" and other actually meaningless terms we wish for numbers, right? It is called empirical evidence... measurable evidence. Terms like "high", "moderate", "low", are fairly meaningless and yet seen a lot whenever government bureaucratic writings are read.

Oh, one more thing I thought irrelevant and almost laughable, and is used incredibly often, is the comparison of childhood development. Children from higher income homes usually develop better than kids from lower income, single-parent, and poorer environments. So, were I to conduct a slanted view.. guess what kids I would round up for what purpose.

My dealings with governmental agencies- and especially that freaking EPA- makes me know that whatever the bureaucrats do, the common man and woman must--MUST-- suspect it.

Pessimism, and skepticism is what I advocate in all things and that holds especially so for any damned thing emanating from Washington, DC.

Reply
 
 
Jan 10, 2018 15:23:45   #
Morgan
 
JFlorio wrote:
This pesticide has been in use since 1965. Why is it now dangerous? I have no problem with banning it if it's negative side effects are truely proven.
I trust most environmental groups just a little less than chemical companies.


You go with profit-making Chemical companies versus people trying to protect the environment which in turn provides us with good health. Your information is wrong it's been banned for decades along with many other DDT's.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 15:25:48   #
Morgan
 
S. Maturin wrote:
That famous chicken must have known something-- THE SKY IS, INDEED, FALLING! We're all gonna die!!

ARMAGEDDON! Sez Nancy.




That's how an idiot would see it, not reasonable people who understand actions and consequences.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 15:36:45   #
S. Maturin
 
Morgan wrote:
That's how an idiot would see it, not reasonable people who understand actions and consequences.


Not really. I cannot recall one of your contributions which was positive about anything.

You are 100% Doom & Gloom.

Take profits made by industries, for instance.. that really upsets you. That is how a troglodyte would see it.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 16:17:48   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
My information is wrong? I can show you article after article saying that compound has been used and is still being used since the mid sixties.Diodn't say I was for or against. Honestly don't know enough about it. However; I do know without many chemicals are lives would suck. I'm not just a lemming that believes everything that agrees with my way of thinking. Two sides to every debate.
Morgan wrote:
You go with profit-making Chemical companies versus people trying to protect the environment which in turn provides us with good health. Your information is wrong it's been banned for decades along with many other DDT's.

Reply
 
 
Jan 10, 2018 16:45:52   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
JFlorio wrote:
I hate dangerous pesticides, but I would hate not having enough food worse. So far all I see is the usual whining and scare tactics.


Then you can look forward to dying with a full stomach.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 17:30:24   #
emarine
 
lindajoy wrote:
Always nice to see you slip in at the most opportune times... You do add so much to the discussions....

How many Scientist are on the take FOR global warming?? Did you check any of them out too??
I mean it’s no secret about the large network of hired pundits and scientists helping to spread the fear mongering, right?? The supposed CO2’s alarming effect is what they use to justify the scam isn’t it?? Scientist arent sponsored by anyone right?? It’s just government concern that gives all this funding or had given all that funding that is now pulled back... and now requires justification in research, right??

The government’s picking winners and losers in the energy market has cost taxpayers billions of dollars, and the rate of failure, cronyism, and corruption at the companies receiving the subsidies is substantial. The fact that some oh say like Solyndra that Bo forked over millions to has absolutely no bearing does it??

Or how about these companies and all those millions later, what is there?? Well they are either gone or faltering soon to be belly up .. And who got all that money ??? Well the good buddy syndrome alone gave them all a hefty income didn’t it?? Are their CEOs or Past chairmen of the board broke now too,?? What, no and that surprises who ????

Many of these names I know you know about maybe you could enlighten us here too??

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:

Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

A hell of a lot of money don’tcha think???
And oh “The 2009 stimulus set aside $80 billion to subsidize politically preferred energy projects. Since that time, 1,900 investigations have been opened to look into stimulus waste, fraud, and abuse (although not all are linked to the green-energy funds), and nearly 600 convictions have been made. Of that $80 billion in clean energy loans, grants, and tax credits, at least 10 percent has gone to companies that have since either gone bankrupt or are circling the drain....”

Hope you’re healthy and well for this New Year of many great things to come..
Always nice to see you slip in at the most opportu... (show quote)




Happy New Year to you & all ... Gov investment into energy R&D is nothing new... you may want to look up many of the company's you listed & find they are as of 2016 alive & well & generate many Billions in revenue and employ 10's of thousands... new tech start up is always risky & we will never hit any home runs without stepping up to the plate... 80 Billion is a boatload of bucks for Shure & it's unfortunate some play games... but look into fossil fuel subsidies over the years & 80 billion is a drop in the bucket... oil company's have been known to generate huge profits without taxpayers help... bottom line is sooner or later we will exhaust fossil fuel reserves... investment now will prolong this & give us time to perfect another energy source before we go to war over the last drop...I found this useful... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2016/08/renewable-energy-was-16-9-percent-of-u-s-electric-generation-in-the-first-half-of-2016.html

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 17:41:51   #
Morgan
 
JFlorio wrote:
My information is wrong? I can show you article after article saying that compound has been used and is still being used since the mid sixties.Diodn't say I was for or against. Honestly don't know enough about it. However; I do know without many chemicals are lives would suck. I'm not just a lemming that believes everything that agrees with my way of thinking. Two sides to every debate.


The pesticide in question, chlorpyrifos, is a nasty piece of work. It’s an organophosphate, a class of bug killers that work by “interrupting the electrochemical processes that nerves use to communicate with muscles and other nerves,” as the Pesticide Encyclopedia puts it. Chlorpyrifos is also an endocrine disrupter, meaning it can cause “adverse developmental, reproductive, neurological, and immune effects,” according to the National Institutes of Health.

This chemical chlorpyrifos is mixed with other insecticides some still being sprayed, you're correct this chemical hadn't been banned yet. After the finding out the results and impact on children Obama tried to have it banned, but Trump has reversed it.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 17:59:13   #
Morgan
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
Then you can look forward to dying with a full stomach.


Welcome Floyed haven't seen you in a while, that was funny and true.

Reply
 
 
Jan 10, 2018 18:06:55   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Fine with me. My family lives into their nineties generally. Might as well be full.
Floyd Brown wrote:
Then you can look forward to dying with a full stomach.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 18:10:46   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Oh, Obama wanted it banned. Must be the scourge of the earth. Actually I have no problem believing it's probably bad therefore; no problem banning it. Seems to me our kids are on so much crap now days a little pesticide might be the least of their problems. When I coached in high school I had to get a list of all the medications each kid on the team was on. I couldn't frigging believe it. This is the most medicated generation in history.
Morgan wrote:
The pesticide in question, chlorpyrifos, is a nasty piece of work. It’s an organophosphate, a class of bug killers that work by “interrupting the electrochemical processes that nerves use to communicate with muscles and other nerves,” as the Pesticide Encyclopedia puts it. Chlorpyrifos is also an endocrine disrupter, meaning it can cause “adverse developmental, reproductive, neurological, and immune effects,” according to the National Institutes of Health.

This chemical chlorpyrifos is mixed with other insecticides some still being sprayed, you're correct this chemical hadn't been banned yet. After the finding out the results and impact on children Obama tried to have it banned, but Trump has reversed it.
The pesticide in question, chlorpyrifos, is a nast... (show quote)

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 18:22:30   #
Morgan
 
S. Maturin wrote:
Not really. I cannot recall one of your contributions which was positive about anything.

You are 100% Doom & Gloom.

Take profits made by industries, for instance.. that really upsets you. That is how a troglodyte would see it.


That must be you then because I don't see it that way. I care about the earth, our health and people, when things are out of wack I try and do something about it, resolve it. For example, not putting poisons on fruits and vegetables that cause brain damage to children or not put toxic ash in our rivers from coal mining or fracking waste going into our water supply. I support all people to have equal rights, no exception. If you find this doom and gloom, then go have mommy read you a bedside story, and we'll handle it.

Reply
Jan 10, 2018 18:30:11   #
Morgan
 
JFlorio wrote:
Oh, Obama wanted it banned. Must be the scourge of the earth. Actually I have no problem believing it's probably bad therefore; no problem banning it. Seems to me our kids are on so much crap now days a little pesticide might be the least of their problems. When I coached in high school I had to get a list of all the medications each kid on the team was on. I couldn't frigging believe it. This is the most medicated generation in history.


Yes, that may very well be true, but have you thought why that is? Aside from the fact we're a drugged induced country, these chemicals that are in their young systems has a negative effect on some, they get all different kinds of symptoms. I recall working with a woman who if she happens to get food with MSG in it she came back to lunch as if she was drunk or high, nor she wasn't either of those, it was quite bizarre and funny because she was fairly conservative, and that was just one meal.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 23 of 64 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.