If not, then why so much fuss over government regulations of factory emissions? Is there actually a difference?
2007-04-03 09:13:27 · 6 answers · asked by pip 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Michele I don't report you! I promise you that. I honestly don't know what to say. the ONLY times I have ever reported anyone is for posting things about children.. that's it.. nothing else ever.. open up your email so we can take this stuff off of these answers.. maybe that will help.
2007-04-03 09:32:45 · update #1
actually Mbush.. I agree with you on this one.. mercury is adding up.. and our seafood absorbs it.. what are your suggestions on how to deal with it?
2007-04-03 09:41:47 · update #2
ugggh 2 times you reported me! Cfc Cfc Cfc! what is the difference you tell us.
2007-04-03 09:28:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't have a problem with a ban on CFC's. I also feel that factory emissions do need to be regulated. Too many people have asthma or some type of lung problems and one of the underlying causes of these problems is pollutants in the air we breath,
2007-04-03 09:20:40 · answer #2 · answered by Mikira 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I have a big problem with it - the ozone hole is LARGER than it was 20 years ago when the CFCs that supposedly caused it were banned.
If CFCs were the cause, clearly it doesn't work the way they said it did.
2007-04-03 09:36:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not I. CFC's being banned helped stabilize the ozone layer - at least it isn't getting worse. But that's another thing the cons fling poo at - anything they can't see or get in a sound bite from Fuxdup Spews.
2007-04-03 09:23:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I did when they did it. I miss my peanuts.
But seriously, there are major differences. No new bureaucracy had to be set up to ban CFC's.
2007-04-03 09:24:59 · answer #5 · answered by Shrink 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have more of a problem with the amounts of Mercury in florecent lightbulbs.
2007-04-03 09:39:12 · answer #6 · answered by mbush40 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋