It has long been stated that what caused the ice age was volcanic smoke in the air which filtered out the sun light and made things cooler. So alongs comes The E P A and puts in a no burn ban and takes out what smoke that there was in the air letting in more sun light which is making things hotter, and to compound the problem the things which should have been burned is now rotting and giving off methane gas which causes more global warming. It should also be noted that the catalytic converter demanded by the EPA makes CO2 gas the one main thing that is supposed to cause Global Warming
2007-05-05 07:23:25 · 9 answers · asked by Ibredd 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The only way to end global warming is to extinguish the sun. CO2 is not the main greenhouse gas, it's only around 5%. Water vapor is 90% of all greenhouse gas. Al Gore can't make a living from telling us to get rid of water vapor, so he ignors it.
2007-05-05 07:35:27 · answer #1 · answered by John S 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
This QUESTION is going to get you some grief but the truth is that the bureaucracy of government often causes problems. Blocking out the sun would lower temperatures but the long term effects of CO2 is the main reason to be up in arms. You could make a case for horses causing gas and you would have made a good point. Not to mention the waste on the freeways. Sometime in the rush to point out something that makes no sense we forget to look at the big picture.
2007-05-05 14:38:06 · answer #2 · answered by Pablo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
CO2 is not the only thing that can pollute the air--and the use of catalytic converters is helpful because it prevents cars from emitting those other pollutants. The cars emit CO2 with or without the converters.
As for restrictions on other forms of burning, those are there for similar reasons. the cheif problem with the EPA is that Bush keeps interfering with the agencies ability to do its job.
2007-05-05 14:43:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is poor logic at best.
Your question should focus on what people can do without the need for federal intervention.
How much of that pollution do you create in a day?
What can you do to prevent the need for intervention?
This isn't about tree hugging. It's about personal responsibility. Try taking some today.
2007-05-05 14:28:22 · answer #4 · answered by Floyd G 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sounds good to me. I'd like to add to your lengthy list only one thing: the continual stream of hot air issuing forth from the mouths of its members.
2007-05-05 14:35:27 · answer #5 · answered by Richard S 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Does not matter, "global warming" is a natural process that humans cannot affect.
2007-05-05 14:32:58 · answer #6 · answered by Halcyon 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
uummmm....you should go back and re-read your source info on this one. I think you may have gotten confused.
2007-05-05 14:32:07 · answer #7 · answered by zeroambition 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no, but we may have to get rid of cars.
2007-05-05 17:20:49 · answer #8 · answered by thevillageidiotxxxxx 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
2007-05-05 14:26:05 · answer #9 · answered by lost.in.love 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋