4/13 podcast: Special Guest Loren Hough -- Georgia Guidestones

Hi Loren,

Do you really know enough to talk on this subject?

We don't claim that the oceans are a topic of specialist expertise at this website. All I know, is what I can read about what the experts say.

The Wikipedia article on ocean acidification purports to be a reflection of expert knowledge. It indicates that the pH of the oceans has dropped an average of .11 since pre-industrial times, meaning that the concentration of H+ ions is up 29%. The change has been accelerating. Experts seem genuinely concerned that such a huge change of pH could easily kill algae and plankton, causing the huge decline in fish and mammals that we're seeing.

Whereas, your own articles say the increase in radioactivity on the West Coast is only 7 Bq per cubic meter, a minuscule amount that is not going to hurt anything. Of course the situation is far worse near Japan, but that's not where we're talking about.

You posted the headline of this ENE News article:

http://enenews.com/professors-large...-sea-life-along-fukushima-coast-missing-video

Go and read the article! It clearly says "Researchers have found no evidence of a link between the ongoing Fukushima disaster and the starfish die-off". The article also contains a lot of fog about concerned citizens who don't believe the researchers, but the headline is about what the professors think.

What do researchers say is the problem? A virus! Why are starfish vulnerable to a virus? Researchers don't say, but if I were going to speculate, I think low pH seems much more likely to be the cause, or maybe lack of food, rather than radiation at 7 Bq/m3.

Why is this so important to you, Loren? I'll tell you why: it seems to be a crucial part of your worldview, that the human race of 7 billion people can go right on burning fossil fuels at the rate we're doing now, or at an increasing rate, with no ecological consequences worth mentioning. You're in denial of any evidence to the contrary.
 
Hi Loren,



We don't claim that the oceans are a topic of specialist expertise at this website. All I know, is what I can read about what the experts say.

The Wikipedia article on ocean acidification purports to be a reflection of expert knowledge. It indicates that the pH of the oceans has dropped an average of .11 since pre-industrial times, meaning that the concentration of H+ ions is up 29%. The change has been accelerating. Experts seem genuinely concerned that such a huge change of pH could easily kill algae and plankton, causing the huge decline in fish and mammals that we're seeing.

Whereas, your own articles say the increase in radioactivity on the West Coast is only 7 Bq per cubic meter, a minuscule amount that is not going to hurt anything. Of course the situation is far worse near Japan, but that's not where we're talking about.

You posted the headline of this ENE News article:

http://enenews.com/professors-large...-sea-life-along-fukushima-coast-missing-video

Go and read the article! It clearly says "Researchers have found no evidence of a link between the ongoing Fukushima disaster and the starfish die-off". The article also contains a lot of fog about concerned citizens who don't believe the researchers, but the headline is about what the professors think.

What do researchers say is the problem? A virus! Why are starfish vulnerable to a virus? Researchers don't say, but if I were going to speculate, I think low pH seems much more likely to be the cause, or maybe lack of food, rather than radiation at 7 Bq/m3.

Why is this so important to you, Loren? I'll tell you why: it seems to be a crucial part of your worldview, that the human race of 7 billion people can go right on burning fossil fuels at the rate we're doing now, or at an increasing rate, with no ecological consequences worth mentioning. You're in denial of any evidence to the contrary.

Wiki
Is this your evidence?

Since the industrial revolution began, it is estimated that surface ocean pH has dropped by slightly more than 0.1 units on the logarithmic scale of pH, representing about a 29% increase in H+. It is expected to drop by a further 0.3 to 0.5 pH units[9](an additional doubling to tripling of today's post-industrial acid concentrations) by 2100 as the oceans absorb more anthropogenic CO

****2, the impacts being most severe for coral reefs and the Southern Ocean.[2][10][27] These changes are predicted to continue rapidly as the oceans take up more anthropogenic CO

2 from the atmosphere. The degree of change to ocean chemistry, including ocean pH, will depend on the mitigation and emissions pathways[28] society takes.[29]

the impacts being most severe ? Where? How do you explain the CO2 problems in the southern hemisphere? less than 500 million live in the southern hemisphere. Is it not true that most the CO2 from humans come from the northern hemisphere? Meaning there is less pollution, run off etc. in the southern hemisphere!

Are you saying co2
sinks to the south?

Is the pH level in the ocean the same everywhere in the ocean?

World view?

Those who believe in CO2 is The evil twin; are so happy I did not have children! because of CO2 i did not have children in order to save the world; Did u have children ? May I ask as u ? U asked me if I believe Fukushima is Bad news; why haven't I Moved south .
 
Last edited:
Wiki
Is this your evidence?

Since the industrial revolution began, it is estimated that surface ocean pH has dropped by slightly more than 0.1 units on the logarithmic scale of pH, representing about a 29% increase in H+. It is expected to drop by a further 0.3 to 0.5 pH units[9](an additional doubling to tripling of today's post-industrial acid concentrations) by 2100 as the oceans absorb more anthropogenic CO

****2, the impacts being most severe for coral reefs and the Southern Ocean.[2][10][27] These changes are predicted to continue rapidly as the oceans take up more anthropogenic CO

2 from the atmosphere. The degree of change to ocean chemistry, including ocean pH, will depend on the mitigation and emissions pathways[28] society takes.[29]

the impacts being most severe ? Where? How do you explain the CO2 problems in the southern hemisphere? less than 500 million live in the southern hemisphere. Is it not true that most the CO2 from humans come from the northern hemisphere? Meaning there is less pollution, run off etc.

Are you saying co2
sinks to the south?

Is the pH level in the ocean the same everywhere in the ocean?

World view?

Those who believe in CO2 is The evil twin; are so happy I did not have children! because of CO2 i did not have children in order to save the world; Did u have children ? May I ask as u ? U asked me if I believe Fukushima is Bad news; why haven't I Moved south .
The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles - NASA Earth Observatory
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/page2.php
by H Riebeek - ‎2011 - ‎Cited by 1 - ‎Related articles
Carbon flows between the atmosphere, land, and ocean in a cycle that ... The product of that reaction, calcium carbonate, is then deposited onto the ocean floor , where it becomes limestone. ... After the organisms die, they sink to the seafloor. ... Carbon locked up in limestone can be stored for millions—or even hundreds of ...
 
Hi Loren,

These are really good questions, and they're worth some work to find the answers. I'm not attached to the outcome of the research; I hope you aren't? The thing about "denial" was a cheap shot, I apologize & hope it isn't the case.

I have one daughter. We probably would've had two or three kids if it weren't for the population bomb. Only minor tinges of regret about that. Obviously it didn't help: others went right on having lots of kids.

My wife & daughter aren't about to leave for Fiji or Uruguay. My wife might go, but only if I have really good evidence, and a solid case that prospects would really be much better down there.
 
Hi Loren,

These are really good questions, and they're worth some work to find the answers. I'm not attached to the outcome of the research; I hope you aren't? The thing about "denial" was a cheap shot, I apologize & hope it isn't the case.

I have one daughter. We probably would've had two or three kids if it weren't for the population bomb. Only minor tinges of regret about that. Obviously it didn't help: others went right on having lots of kids.

My wife & daughter aren't about to leave for Fiji or Uruguay. My wife might go, but only if I have really good evidence, and a solid case that prospects would really be much better down there.
Warning fake blood children acting as climate deniers, see the real population bomb who's the baby boomers children? who's the boom of the bomb see for yourself. who's pushing the button? Do your eyes lie?
  • 10:10 video - YouTube
    upload_2015-5-1_21-15-58.jpeg▶ 4:00
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Mw5_EBk0g
    Oct 1, 2010 - Uploaded by stan10302
    new fascio comedy from 10:10 org. killing sceptical school children. ... Scary global warming ...
    You might want to look at which big boys put this video out
  • No Pressure (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Pressure_(film)
    Promotional banner for No Pressure displayed on the 10:10 website prior to the film's ... 2010 short film produced by the global warming mitigation campaign 10: 10, .... Dominic Lawson wrote "As often as 10:10 tried to pull the film off YouTube, ...
  • Happy you're not attached to wear your search research leads you ; I'm afraid some people are.
  • I would be the happiest man in the world to find out my fears and concerns about the timing of the disaster in the North Pacific ocean that unfolds in the in enenews headlines, is not radiation. And just plastique run off CO2 etc. such an easier problem to solve.
  • I am not moving to Fiji because I want to, would much rather be at my farm near my father brother etc.
  • I put in lots of hours in California standing out in front of grocery stores talking to people to vote for labeling of GMO. The big boys say it's so good for you we don't have to label it.
  • If you had more money than God why not give money to both sides of any issue.
  • In order to influence the outcome.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_mitigation

  • My understanding of the world records for hot and cold is equal. As I said first they say it's getting colder than they say it's getting hotter & now they're saying it's just changing, (as it always does) because of CO2 because there's too many people. Etc.
  • The new word for the big boys is climate denier, is anybody denying that we have a climate?
 
Last edited:
Warning fake blood children acting as climate deniers, see the real population bomb who's the baby boomers children? who's the boom of the bomb see for yourself. who's pushing the button? Do your eyes lie?
  • 10:10 video - YouTube
    View attachment 85▶ 4:00
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Mw5_EBk0g
    Oct 1, 2010 - Uploaded by stan10302
    new fascio comedy from 10:10 org. killing sceptical school children. ... Scary global warming ...
    You might want to look at which big boys put this video out
  • No Pressure (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Pressure_(film)
    Promotional banner for No Pressure displayed on the 10:10 website prior to the film's ... 2010 short film produced by the global warming mitigation campaign 10: 10, .... Dominic Lawson wrote "As often as 10:10 tried to pull the film off YouTube, ...
  • Happy you're not attached to wear your search research leads you ; I'm afraid some people are.
  • I would be the happiest man in the world to find out my fears and concerns about the timing of the disaster in the North Pacific ocean that unfolds in the in enenews headlines, is not radiation. And just plastique run off CO2 etc. such an easier problem to solve.
  • I am not moving to Fiji because I want to, would much rather be at my farm near my father brother etc.
  • I put in lots of hours in California standing out in front of grocery stores talking to people to vote for labeling of GMO. The big boys say it's so good for you we don't have to label it.
  • If you had more money than God why not give money to both sides of any issue.
  • In order to influence the outcome.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_mitigation

  • My understanding of the world records for hot and cold is equal. As I said first they say it's getting colder than they say it's getting hotter & now they're saying it's just changing, (as it always does) because of CO2 because there's too many people. Etc.
  • The new word for the big boys is climate denier, is anybody denying that we have a climate?
World veiw 1991 when I bought my farm I installed wind generation and solar panels and batteries. In 1983 I was selling solar energy products in Santa Cruz California, went on to start the vitamin company called rainbow light. The only vitamin company I know today with zero GMO products in their vitamins.

Since college days in the 70s I've been against nuclear power from the day I learned about it.

Game changing battery from Tesla!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2015/05/01/did-tesla-just-kill-nuclear-power/


great quote from Arnie Gundersen: “We all know that the wind doesn’t blow consistently and the sun doesn’t shine every day,” he said, “but the nuclear industry would have you believe that humankind is smart enough to develop techniques to store nuclear waste for a quarter of a million years, but at the same time human kind is so dumb we can’t figure out a way to store solar electricity overnight. To me that doesn’t make sense.”
 
Last edited:
That is a very inexpensive battery, 2 cents per kilowatt hour. I think that the battery in the Nissan Leaf is closer to 20 cents per kWh.
 
That is a very inexpensive battery, 2 cents per kilowatt hour. I think that the battery in the Nissan Leaf is closer to 20 cents per kWh.
I thought you'd like that battery.
The question is how long will The tesla battery last? The Tesla battery looks great to me. I remember being told that if all of us use fluorescent lightbulbs we could get rid of the nuclear power plants. Everybody started using the bulbs and we still have the nuclear power plant sorry to say. The environmentalist who were promoting the fluorescent lightbulb did not bother to tell us if they broke you have to use as hasMatt suits to clean up the super toxic powder Mercury.
 
The life of the battery figures into the cost. The battery in the Nissan car is ~25 kwh, costs ~$5000 and lasts about 1000 full charges. So, 25 kwh * 1000 / $5000 is 20 cents per kWh. Actually the battery doesn't go bad all at once, it gradually loses capacity and maybe becomes more likely to spontaneously catch on fire in the garage. I hope it's recyclable.
 
Hi Loren,

These are really good questions, and they're worth some work to find the answers. I'm not attached to the outcome of the research; I hope you aren't? The thing about "denial" was a cheap shot, I apologize & hope it isn't the case.

I have one daughter. We probably would've had two or three kids if it weren't for the population bomb. Only minor tinges of regret about that. Obviously it didn't help: others went right on having lots of kids.

My wife & daughter aren't about to leave for Fiji or Uruguay. My wife might go, but only if I have really good evidence, and a solid case that prospects would really be much better down there.
Sickened Alaska seals concentrated where Fukushima radioactive plume made landfall after 3/11 (MAPS)
Published: September 19th, 2012 at 3:17 pm ET
By ENENews
jerry is there a lot of plastic and toxic run off from all the people in Alaska and if its co2 why here and now the seals are dying ?

Compare the two maps below, paying special attention to Alaska’s West Coast

Map of Marine Life Deaths:

mapseals.jpg


Map from a study appearing in the upcoming edition of the journal Science of the Total Environment (Note the blue line):

img_100-Sep.-18-02.30.jpg


maps_alaska.jpg

:44 AM EST on March 12th, 2013 | 75 comments
Study: Fukushima fallout detected in fish from Atlantic Ocean

Bioaccumulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioaccumulation
Bioaccumulation
refers to the accumulation of substances, such as pesticides, or other chemicals in an organism. Bioaccumulation occurs when an organism absorbs a ...
New Stuff
nuclear-bomb-658x585.jpg

Jay+ · EDUCATION · FOUNDATIONAL



Mar04
What is Bio-Accumulation?

Currently many information sources are downplaying the ferocity of “hot particles” finding their way to North America by air and sea –Equating the health risks they present to eating one too many bananas, or to our limited exposure to existing radiation emitting devices. You can also read our glossary of bioaccumulation terms here.

Bioaccumulation of radioactive particles has been gaining strength since the onset of the industrial revolution and early nuclear weapons tests; The sheer scale of Fukushima’s ongoing nuclear disaster is sure to have lasting affects on our gene pool.

Dispelling these pseudoscience radiation myths is of great importance if we are going to have an open and honest discussion with our governments about nuclear technology now and in the future.

The key to eliminating myths, lies, and disinformation surrounding radiation rests partly on an understanding of bio-accumulation, bio magnification, and the difference between the two.

What is bio-accumulation?
Bio-accumulation refers to how pollutants enter the food chain, and how long they linger based on solubility and other factors.

What is bio-magnification?
Bio-magnification refers to how a pollutant can increase its concentration when passed from one link in the food chain to another.

A Simple Process
Imagine drinking a glass of water that has one radioactive particle in it. Your body absorbs that one particle. It is not good for you, it may increase your risk of cancer, but statistically speaking the risks are very low.

Now imagine drinking 8 glasses of that water a day, 365 days a year. You now potentially have 2,920 radioactive particles inside of you.

Some radiation flushes out of your body easier than others. Strontium-90 for example, mimics calcium. It gets into your bones and teeth, and it stays there.

This can also happen in the ocean and our land based food supplies. Seaweed can show levels of radiation 100 times higher than the water it is growing in. Then a little fish spends half it’s life eating that seaweed, giving it levels of radiation 1000 times higher than that of the same water it is swimming in. Then a bigger fish spends half it’s life eating the little fish. It now has 100,000 times more radiation in it. And this process of bio-magnification in conjunction with bio-accumulation continues up the food chain.

The same happens with radioactive fallout onto farms. Milk is particularly notorious for showing high radiation levels after fallout covers the grass. The cows eat the grass, and it gets concentrated into their fatty milk; Water soluble pollutants are easily excreted by organisms, however oil soluble toxins may linger, stored away in fat deposits in the host body. Mushrooms and leafy greens also tend to show high levels of bio-accumulation.

So when you see test results of ocean water, air, or small organisms low on the food chain showing minimal numbers, remember those numbers amplify as they move up the food chain significantly.

A Cyclical Problem
Simply put, hot particles may not pose much of a threat outside of your body.

However it is quite likely hot particles will find their way inside your body, due to ongoing radioactive gas emission from Fukushima in air currents and weather patterns, as well as its polluted leakage into the ocean through the water table.




“The average person breathes in 10 cubic metres of air per day”
- Arnie Gundersen


During fallout, radiation is hard to detect in food, water and air without specialized equipment, and even more difficult to remove.

A radioactive particle inside your body can continue to irradiate surrounding tissues for the remainder of your life, affecting fertility, creating birth defects, and increasing chances of cancer as a result.

While we may not be able to resist every way hot particles can get into our bodies, there are steps we can take to prevent our exposure, and proactively expel them from our bodies through diet while healing ourselves from the damage they induce



Check out: http://radiationprevention.com/what-is-bio-accumulation-bio-magnification/#ixzz3Z6v5r9ci

so the let dog take one wiff and see how long it takes to kill them and how; they know; why did president of usa go to south America for 2 weeks just after 3-11-11




    • Right time for Pres. Obama to go to Latin America ...
      caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/21/right-time-for-pres-obama-to...
      Mar 21, 2011 · Of course it's the right time for President Obama to go to Latin America, ... he is in South America. I know the President is ... 2011 and we have ...
Beagle Dog Experiments - New International Radiobiology ...
janus.northwestern.edu/nira/index.php/Beagle_Dog_Experiments
Overview . The Beagle Dog Experiments were carried out at a variety of National Laboratories. The Beagle Dog was chosen as an experimental animal because of its
src="
"



src="
"



Officials report "troubling discovery" at Fukushima nuclear plant: Cesium levels rocket 9,000% over 3 days in groundwater — TEPCO "can't explain it"
http://tinyurl.com/lb2uxks
 
Last edited:
greetings Joe A

when u have the time do a quick look of this page on my site;
i put this up a year ago and u will see 'your stuff' I put up to help people see the bigger picture;

Letter: We have been dosed with cancer causing plutonium for years in California and the only solution is to get away. (By evacuating) Telling people everything is okay, is morally wrong.
my friend pam would like to chime in she moved to Uruguay 3 years ago. this is her opium of fukushima she is a house wife mother.

Yeah. We voted for Obama (the other guy was so much worse!), but we have serious issues over his having whisked his own First Daughters away to avoid the plume, yet floating Caroline Kennedy's name, the Kennedy First Daughter, for new Ambassador to Japan! We find that inhuman, monstrous.

Published: January 5th, 2014 at 5:20 pm ET
By ENENews

“We see radiation from Fukushima in soils in Southern California, especially our desert regions” — High concentrations in seaweed prevented harvest this year — Also found in cattle and chicken feed.

Dr. Sherridan Ross, medical doctor, retired professor at University of California – Irvine, member of the Board of Directors at The Compton Community Organic Garden: Over here we’ve done a lot of things to make sure that our food supply has been safe, but it’s also cost us quite a bit. What we’d usually do is harvest a lot of the seaweed for places such as the Central Valley where a lot of our root crops, and also our lettuce and things come from. But because of the high concentration of radiation that’s in the seaweed, we haven’t been able to do that this year. We try to use the coast of California — initially we’d harvest tons of it, because it’s a renewable source, it’s very good, good for sucking up radiation and stuff that’s in the soil — that was our ‘out’.
 
Last edited:
Hi Loren,

I found an answer to one of your questions. The Australian government website says:

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-...ge/ocean-acidification-and-the-southern-ocean

The Southern Ocean contains more CO2 than other oceans because cooler water absorbs more CO2 than warmer water. Thus, the impacts of ocean acidification will appear first in the Southern Ocean.

This is interesting not only because it explains the statements in the Wiki article to the effect that Southern oceans are worst effected; but also, it questions whether the Southern Hemisphere is really so invulnerable to what happens in the North. If our CO2 gets down there, why not also our radioactive contaminants?
 
Hi Loren,

I found an answer to one of your questions. The Australian government website says:

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-...ge/ocean-acidification-and-the-southern-ocean



This is interesting not only because it explains the statements in the Wiki article to the effect that Southern oceans are worst effected; but also, it questions whether the Southern Hemisphere is really so invulnerable to what happens in the North. If our CO2 gets down there, why not also our radioactive contaminants?

here some more questions that begged to be asked;
only 500 million live in the south would you not say the most of man made co2 is in the north H?
wiki says the total of all co2 man made and natural is .03% of all air average of that how much of he man made co2 makes it 35 % south of equator and how long of time? were the cooler air is? how much is locked up in limestone for ever almost and how fast does that form in the coldest water? see video below the simulation from NOAA's HYSPLIT model!!!!!! were does the dust from volcanos go as there are tracked very closely is how you will know. were the radiation goes, were does the dust from china go? were did the fire bombs from japan in ww2 go? how many balloons made it to the south H? none!; and how fast? how many balloons made it to Oregon?
Fire balloon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_balloon
A fire balloon (風船爆弾, fūsen bakudan, lit. "balloon bomb"), or Fu-Go (Windship Weapon), was a weapon launched by Japan during World War II.


is not the south pole having record cold as the north pole recorded warmth? were is the ocean life dyeing in the south and why only coral? is there coral dyeing off the coast of japan or Hawaii ? so the good new is the coral dying in the south is not plastic, run off, or warm water!!! ya ! do you find any evidence of man made radiation in the south killing sea life? my I remind you the quote I gave you in the that the wood ash tested in the north was 100000 times more radioactive in the north then the south and that was before fukushima. page 191 'the enemy within' by jay m. gould

  • Jay M. Gould - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_M._Gould
    Joseph J. Mangano, Jay M. Gould, ... Amazon indicates a 1993 edition (3rd?) ... Gould, Jay M. (1996). The Enemy Within: ...
    What the government doesn't want you to know about Nukes
    By Paul David Tuff on November 19, 1999
    Format: Paperback
    In a followup to his 1991 book _Deadly Deceit_, Gould issues a devestating indictment of the nuclear power industry. Using his irreproachable statistical expertise (in over 30 years, he never lost a court case in which he appeared as an expert statistical witness), Gould shows the direct correlation between deadly diseases and living downwind from nuclear reactors. Why does the U.S. government no longer release the data showing the amount of radiation released from Nukes? Because they don't want you to know that Nukes never have been and never will be safe. Instead, they are exposing U.S. citizens to deadly toxins that kill them or make them more susceptible to cancers and autoimmune diseases. For anyone who wants the irrefutable evidence supporting these claims, this is a book thoughs who what to know what there living next door to must read;
Search Inside This Book






Sample searches in this book:
contiguous rural counties
initial criticality
trillion picocuries












Just so you know...




1568580665.01.S005.LXXXXXXX.jpg


1568580665.01.S006.LXXXXXXX.jpg


1568580665.01.S007.LXXXXXXX.jpg

="
"


="
"
>

The Effects of Fukushima's Cesium Pollution by Steven Starr
http://antinuclear.net/2011/04/04/rel...

The Effects of Fukushima's Cesium Pollution by Steven Starr
http://antinuclear.net/2011/04/04/rel...


Published on May 1, 2012 below with your own eyes how much goes to the southern hemisphere ? who's model is this? video below click on it

In this dataset, the simulation from NOAA's HYSPLIT model shows a continuous release of tracer particles from 12-31 March at a rate of 100 per hour representing the Cesium-137 emitted from Fukushima Daiichi. Each change in particle color represents a decrease in radioactivity by a factor of 10. Radioactivity decreases due to removal by rainfall and gravitational settling. Decay is not a factor for Cesium in this short duration simulation compared to its 30 year long-half life. The air concentration would be computed from the particle density so it is only partially related to the color scale. The released particles are followed through the end of April using meteorological data from the 1-degree resolution NOAA global analyses.
http://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/Atmosphe...

src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HCzuPm4T4qo"


<
" src="
"

 
Last edited:
Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?


By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: November 20th, 2009

here is a example of someone who doesn't believe that man made co2 is bad for the people but also not in favor of solar; is the way they confuse the ideas because one can think co2 is good for you and still be for solar. update

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...n-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/
 
Last edited:
Hi Loren,



We don't claim that the oceans are a topic of specialist expertise at this website. All I know, is what I can read about what the experts say.

The Wikipedia article on ocean acidification purports to be a reflection of expert knowledge. It indicates that the pH of the oceans has dropped an average of .11 since pre-industrial times, meaning that the concentration of H+ ions is up 29%. The change has been accelerating. Experts seem genuinely concerned that such a huge change of pH could easily kill algae and plankton, causing the huge decline in fish and mammals that we're seeing.

Whereas, your own articles say the increase in radioactivity on the West Coast is only 7 Bq per cubic meter, a minuscule amount that is not going to hurt anything. Of course the situation is far worse near Japan, but that's not where we're talking about.

You posted the headline of this ENE News article:

http://enenews.com/professors-large...-sea-life-along-fukushima-coast-missing-video

Go and read the article! It clearly says "Researchers have found no evidence of a link between the ongoing Fukushima disaster and the starfish die-off". The article also contains a lot of fog about concerned citizens who don't believe the researchers, but the headline is about what the professors think.

What do researchers say is the problem? A virus! Why are starfish vulnerable to a virus? Researchers don't say, but if I were going to speculate, I think low pH seems much more likely to be the cause, or maybe lack of food, rather than radiation at 7 Bq/m3.

Why is this so important to you, Loren? I'll tell you why: it seems to be a crucial part of your worldview, that the human race of 7 billion people can go right on burning fossil fuels at the rate we're doing now, or at an increasing rate, with no ecological consequences worth mentioning. You're in denial of any evidence to the contrary.
I love solar not because of co2 and to many people or some said so! never have been for coal but because of you thoughts on co2 u label me sorry to say;
your fear of running out of coal or using it are false as u can see how fast we can and are moving to wind and solar and better batteries but I do not see them taken care of the nuke plants where to put the waste etc. is my fear
Wind power in the European Union - Wikipedia, the free ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_European_Union
... installed wind power capacity in the European Union ... Spain is the leading generator of wind energy in Europe and ... North Germany, and
 
Hi Loren,

I found an answer to one of your questions. The Australian government website says:

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-...ge/ocean-acidification-and-the-southern-ocean



This is interesting not only because it explains the statements in the Wiki article to the effect that Southern oceans are worst effected; but also, it questions whether the Southern Hemisphere is really so invulnerable to what happens in the North. If our CO2 gets down there, why not also our radioactive contaminants?
***WERE DOES COARL GROW? and were does it not?


Locations of coral reefs


Boundary for 20 °C isotherms. Most corals live within this boundary. Note the cooler waters caused by upwelling on the southwest coast of Africa and off the coast of Peru.



This map shows areas of upwelling in red. Coral reefs are not found in coastal areas where colder and nutrient-rich

*******the man made co2 that has sunk in to cold ocean then mixes ? were and how fast and how much of co2 make it to were the warm water make coral? and does the coral die form from man made co2 or cold water? what is the difference in ph in warm water then cold? and how evenly mixed? do you see a lot of mixing from north to south? of equator?
Worldoceancurrents.gif

Coral reefs are rare along the west coasts of the Americas and Africa, due primarily to upwelling and strong cold coastal currents that reduce water temperatures in these areas (respectively the Peru, Benguela and Canary streams).[32] Corals are seldom found along the coastline of South Asia—from the eastern tip of India (Chennai) to the Bangladesh and Myanmar borders[2]—as well as along the coasts of northeastern South America and Bangladesh, due to the freshwater release from the Amazon and Ganges Rivers respectively.


Brain coral

th
were does the wind blow all man made co2? do you see a lot of mixing of air here? between the north and south hemisphere ?

**and if co2 sinks in cold at the pooling of air and water at the poles would ice core show a what co2 looked like at the warmer parts of the earth; ?

is man made co2 so bad? as the UN says and PU radiation so good as the UN wants more nuke plants? as it turns is back on japan? every country in the world should be helping poor japan!

10,000 per revived paper a day should focus on what to do with fukshma and the other 1000 pants but no all I here is co2 is bad pu is good if you just smile
 
Last edited:
Hello Loren,

I would agree that mixing of air between northern and southern hemisphere does not seem to happen at the same rate as mixing within each hemisphere, so that contaminants released in the north circulate there first. But, the ocean acidification data does also indicate that some mixing between north and south does occur.

This doesn't feel very conversational: you blast me with more than a dozen questions, a book, three videos, and a contradiction (dump all alternative energy stocks now because that industry is going down, vs. we are rapidly adopting solar & wind and will soon get rid of coal -- both unlikely propositions), all without addressing what I said, except in the most oblique possible way.
 
Hello Loren,

I would agree that mixing of air between northern and southern hemisphere does not seem to happen at the same rate as mixing within each hemisphere, so that contaminants released in the north circulate there first. But, the ocean acidification data does also indicate that some mixing between north and south does occur.

This doesn't feel very conversational: you blast me with more than a dozen questions, a book, three videos, and a contradiction (dump all alternative energy stocks now because that industry is going down, vs. we are rapidly adopting solar & wind and will soon get rid of coal -- both unlikely propositions), all without addressing what I said, except in the most oblique possible way.
Hi Jerry;
sorry can keep to a conversation if that's what you would like. was trying but not easy for I want to write for those who will come and my have more time to think about what is important to know. as far as air mixing watch the last 4.42 min shows how little air mixes with south and north as I said little mixing not no mixing. I think you raise good questions I may not be able to answers they way you would like.
="
" as this was a example of people not against co2 and not for solar or for big coal etc. right as I said you seem to have suggest I was; >dump all alternative energy stocks now because that industry is going down, vs. we are rapidly adopting solar & wind and will soon get rid of coal -- both unlikely propositions),yes and which proposition did I take? questions can be answers yes?

this is the 1 st site I have every tried to share in a conversation thanks for guiding me. if it helps you I need not address my thought to you but to the people who have ears to hear; joe asked us I believe to come to this site and ask him questions and to bring answers from our 'search' ; parts of the puzzle of castors messiah of today and how and who; thanks to let me try to help Joe; help the world; this is the one podcast thread that I was on that Joe asked me to do so. so I was trying my best for joe.
Loren
 
Last edited:
*******
******this is for anybody who would like to understand the fukushima cover up; they want to turn on nuke plants in japan; 6 new nuke plants in India; 11 in Russia; 26 in china under construction and plans to build 30 nuke power; {7:25 min in } because of 'co2'!!!!! here for your self from japan news

Published on May 3, 2015
This is ONLY a Fukushima update. I didn't include the Chernobyl Fire info in this update. I've heard people reuploading Chernobyl fire info are getting hit with copyright claims.
We start the info with a "Possible Leak" at Fukushima that TEPCO and Clan Ensure hasn't breached the barriers. Of Course it didn't!
MORE Workers Hurt in TEPCO's Scrapping of the Nuclear Reactors. Discussion of the number of nuclear reactors....
TEPCO to remove reactor condom cover from reactor 1 but has community "worried" they might become re-contaminated after it's removal. Don't forget about the re-contamination after they unveiled r2. Tsunami warning lifted... so forget about tsunamis or earthquakes wrecking any of these facilities. (well, at least for today).
Kansai Electri files to extend use of reactors longer than 40 years - to pay for the Fukushima Daiichi disaster.... (screw popular opinion and push on).
Takahama restart, taiwan food imports rejected, and a few vid's I didn't include about various topics so that you don't lose your attention span on "cool biz dress code", the A bomb survivors anniversary, Abe wanting the USA to invest in Japan in fields such as farming, agriculture, health care, etc.....

EXPERT CAUTIONS THAT 30 MILLION SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL RODS UNSAFE IN UNITED STATES https://youtu.be/k8-nwC9ubvY

President Obama we do not expect harmful levels of radiation to reach the U.S https://youtu.be/lpAqiGSp29c

Japan Admits 3 Nuclear Meltdowns, More Radiation Leaked into Sea; U.S. Nuclear Waste Poses Deadly Risks http://www.democracynow.org/2011/6/10...


="
"

the gg stones say 500 million and they are not joking they call it the brave new world n the century of change. fukushima 100 old full of waste in water nuke plants in usa is one way to get there way
 
Last edited:
Hi Loren,

I can see that your posts here can have a dual purpose: conversation with me, Joe & perhaps others if they're interested; and also communicating with others who might visit our forum.

But when it comes to your communicating directly with other visitors to our site, I do feel some sense of responsibility. You have your own website where you can post these materials. I can't let you turn this into a forum for posting ideas that you can't defend in conversation with me & others at the website. (Not that Joe, Rick & I agree about everything -- but we are trying to maintain some standards.)

Earlier in this thread, you quoted a letter from 'Pam' with a headline "Telling people everything is okay, is morally wrong."

Now, I'm convinced that everything is not OK about nuclear power, and I'm very concerned about the health of life in the oceans. I think that this topic is very worthwhile overall.

But -- what I feel is morally wrong, is telling people that "everything is OK" about CO2 emissions, anthropogenic global warming (AGW), ocean acidification, overfishing, plastics in the ocean, etcetera. You've been saying that it's all a hoax, that it is being foisted on us by elite bankers, part of a de-population agenda, and so forth, and I think that's an oversimplification. These are all real problems, which interact in complex ways with the radioactive contamination problem.

The implication that we need to choose between fossil fuels vs. nuclear power plants is a false dialectic. I don't support nuclear power; on the contrary, I think we need a program to shut down the existing reactors and store away the nuclear waste as safely as possible. It might eventually become feasible to transmute these radioactive substances back into safe long-lived isotopes eventually, if the human race survives that long.

I also feel concerns about the idea that people can save themselves by moving to Fiji. I mean, it might work! I'm willing to believe that you'll improve your odds, or at least live for a few years longer. But I hope we also have something to offer for people who want to stay here and fight for survival.
 
Back
Top