Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2014 15:16:19 GMT -5
Those progressives sure like to think big! For some time now we have been discussing the concept of man having greater impact on the planet's climate than the sun. And progressives have done a marvelous job of selling this fallacy to the masses. But... That is not enough. Now they want to sell us on the extra-ordinary concept that our water consumption is changing the earth's geologic processes!LOL, "just by humans sucking the water out of the ground.".... As if mankind is sucking the mountains taller. Dude that is one huge suck!
|
|
|
Post by mohs on May 15, 2014 15:42:36 GMT -5
that's just hill of beans!
mostly
|
|
stephent
starting to spend too much on rocks
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_teal.png)
Member since March 2014
Posts: 213
|
Post by stephent on May 15, 2014 17:19:08 GMT -5
Probably true for Californy... but it's the extra weight of all the water being pumped and rerouted into all the irrigation canals that's pushing down so hard so to raise them mountains. It's couldn't possibly be that Californy is trying to go visit Alaska and rubbing to hard while traveling up that-a-way. Or...it could be a few of them bright scientist theorists fellers have been drinkin that Silicon Valley ground water they poisoned so bad back in the 70's to the 90's.
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on May 15, 2014 17:23:26 GMT -5
Still trying to wrap my brain around how removing water from the ground would make the mountains higher. I know that pumping ground water from the aquifers (example, Borrego Springs, so they can water the golf courses and hydrate a growing population), and not replacing it will cause the ground to subside. Mountains to grow? Sounds pretty far fetched...
The water being removed is under the mountains, in the ground, not sitting on top of them where decreased weight could allow them to rise. Okay, I'll buy that they could be rising, but really, man is causing it? "1 to 3 mm per year" - is that significant? Since they brought it up, what is the distance ground gets displaced along the San Andreas fault in a year's time? As much as two inches per year.
They said most of the 500 GPS sensors "have been recording data for at least four years (some have records extending back to the late 1990s)." In geologic time, I wouldn't even call that a moment! Not even a blip on the radar.
Someone help me out here. I went link jumping, but never could find who funded the "study", just that it was done by a group of geologists at Western Washington University, reading data - and apparently, coming to their own conclusions.
Just my thoughts on this...
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on May 15, 2014 18:06:06 GMT -5
It doesn't matter, anyway. Didn't France just say that we only had 500 days left?
|
|
|
Post by mohs on May 15, 2014 18:25:18 GMT -5
The French are full of beans ! & I'm not disparaging the French or any members Heck I'm French but those frenchy drink & think and there better at the former moi` mostly
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2014 18:54:53 GMT -5
french beansPoulet au Cassoulet ![](http://withfriendship.com/images/i/40846/Cassoulet-image.jpg) yum...
|
|
|
Post by mohs on May 15, 2014 19:01:30 GMT -5
![(rofl)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/rofl.png) pardon-- would have any Dijon ?
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on May 15, 2014 19:12:38 GMT -5
Tela, is that right? Only 500 days left? Must be because were sucking the mountains taller, lol.
Ditto what Ed said, full of beans.
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on May 15, 2014 19:26:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mohs on May 15, 2014 21:20:29 GMT -5
what about the ROCKS ! ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2014 23:44:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on May 16, 2014 9:12:39 GMT -5
The rocks and cockroaches will be the only 2 things left.
|
|
|
Post by mohs on May 16, 2014 10:31:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on May 16, 2014 11:10:05 GMT -5
The rocks and cockroaches will be the only 2 things left. You forgot politicians... Oh wait, you said cockroaches ![(rofl)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/rofl.png)
|
|
tkvancil
fully equipped rock polisher
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Member since September 2011
Posts: 1,546
|
Post by tkvancil on May 16, 2014 11:17:24 GMT -5
What they claim is that the weight of the water removed allows the pressures of the mantle to more easily push the crust upward. I could see that being the case in a simple logical way. I don't really now enough about geology however to know if it's a real possibility.
I think it's somewhat naïve to think that human activity cannot change the planet. We have certainly changed the face of it. Lebanon was covered in a Cedar forest in ancient times. Egyptians and other ship builders took down nearly every tree there. To this day there is little forestation in that area of the world. All done with hand tools and manual labor. My home state, Illinois, was about 38% forest before settlement. Today only about 4%, and again most of that was done pre-industrialization. Many of our large cities have poor air quality. Smog and haze don't come from panther farts. We have changed the course of rivers, drained and created lakes. Our garbage even litters the oceans and we don't even live in them. I'm sure that these few examples of change could be considered "cosmetic" and of no import by some.
In the end it doesn't matter which side of the debate you are on. If climate change is real we will be our own demise. If not we will reach critical mass due to over population. Either way the earth will be here until the sun goes nova. Besides that the planet is due for another mass extinction in relative short order is it not?
|
|
|
Post by washingtonrocks on May 16, 2014 12:29:26 GMT -5
"just by humans sucking the water out of the ground.".... LOL. There we pesky humans go again...Unnecessarily consuming all of that water. How shameful. Think of that poor deprived mountain next time you pour yourself that tall, refreshing, thirst quenching glass of water on a hot summer's day and "suck" it down. Mmkay? Just think of the mountain... ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2014 12:54:42 GMT -5
What they claim is that the weight of the water removed allows the pressures of the mantle to more easily push the crust upward. I could see that being the case in a simple logical way. I don't really now enough about geology however to know if it's a real possibility. I think it's somewhat naïve to think that human activity cannot change the planet. We have certainly changed the face of it. Lebanon was covered in a Cedar forest in ancient times. Egyptians and other ship builders took down nearly every tree there. To this day there is little forestation in that area of the world. All done with hand tools and manual labor. My home state, Illinois, was about 38% forest before settlement. Today only about 4%, and again most of that was done pre-industrialization. Many of our large cities have poor air quality. Smog and haze don't come from panther farts. We have changed the course of rivers, drained and created lakes. Our garbage even litters the oceans and we don't even live in them. I'm sure that these few examples of change could be considered "cosmetic" and of no import by some. In the end it doesn't matter which side of the debate you are on. If climate change is real we will be our own demise. If not we will reach critical mass due to over population. Either way the earth will be here until the sun goes nova. Besides that the planet is due for another mass extinction in relative short order is it not? Cutting down trees in the middle east until none remain is NOT the same as: - Claiming that humans can change geologic processes
- Have greater influence on the climate than the sun does
Changing the planet, as you put it, is way different than the two items above. Your comments were, however, a nice effort in obfuscation and re-direction.
|
|
|
Post by mohs on May 16, 2014 14:06:03 GMT -5
Now now Scott I’m the master of obfugation & re-direction
Mostly
|
|
ash
spending too much on rocks
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_teal.png)
Prairieville, Louisiana
Member since July 2012
Posts: 361
|
Post by ash on May 17, 2014 9:49:51 GMT -5
Sadly, no one seems to speak of rain forest deforestation, which in my opinion, is a huge problem, but most of the crap put out by the talking heads about how human activities, farts and such, are affecting the actual biosphere is hubris.
|
|