Editor:
This morning I listened to KXEL radio, each Saturday morning they have a program, "the Car Doctor." I got in on the last part of one segment. They were discussing Global Warming or if you wish "the Green New Deal". Some research has determined that Cattle with their unique digestive system (they are ruminants) emit more greenhouse gases than all of hydrocarbon transportation. It is a mixture of methane and other digestive gases. So the environmentalist wants us to kill all our cows; Knuckleheads! Also learned termites emit gases as well. But no mention of those - so they can continue to live. Does this sound whacky to you? The thing is we need energy from all sources and we need cows as they, like other ruminants, convert cellulose (grass and hay) into milk, fiber, and food. As any Rancher can tell you, we have thousands of acres of grassland. NOTE: A single cow produces between 154 to 264 pounds of methane gas per year. Not counting the emissions of any other livestock, 1.5 billion cattle, raised specifically for meat production worldwide, emit at least 231 billion pounds of methane into the atmosphere each year (Our World in Data). NOTE: Humans emit this gas as well as exhaling CO2. Even with 100% compliance man will still not be able to control the weather or the World temperature! Some things are beyond human ability to control.
In the next segment, they discussed EVs. It turns out that the Tesla body is manufactured in a different way than normal cars, which they described as an engineering advancement. But, a normal car has a steel frame if in a collision and bent, the frame can be straightened, but an aluminum frame tends to break and would be difficult if not impossible to repair. The end product, the vehicle is junked, the investment is gone. Who wants to invest thousands into a vehicle that can't be repaired?
And another question - where are the recharging stations so that cross-country travel can be achieved? - How long would charging take? - and how reliable are these battery-powered vehicles in the low temperatures we now have? The fact is the elites have not thought the deal through; shame on them. They expect us to comply without question while they rake in the dough and bankrupt the rest of us.
So, to the critics write about the issues I raise - criticizing me and ignoring the issue will not solve the problem and the economic harm to all. Take a step back, take a breath, think it through.
Regards, and blessings
John Stiegelmeyer
Comments
Submit a CommentPlease refresh the page to leave Comment.
Still seeing this message? Press Ctrl + F5 to do a "Hard Refresh".
Nature can handle a certain amount of "greenhouse gases" - in fact, plants require CO2. The concern isn't that humans & their inventions produce them, it's that we produce more than nature can handle. I hear more complaints about cow gases from MAGAt and MAGAt-wannabes these days than from anyone actually concerned about climate change - I don't think it's something anyone is concerned about, other than vegans that hate that we eat animals and MAGAts that haven't found anything new to be outraged about.
As far as reducing greenhouse gasses and global warming goes, this earth has gone through climate change hundreds of times. It's only in the recent past that the nut jobs started to blame humans. This would be the same nuts who require us to put warning labels on everything. Apparently, they do not have the common sense to keep from putting their feet under a running mower. So.. we have a warning label complete with a picture. These same wack jobs complained about paper bags until we all had to go to plastic bags. Now plastic bags are bad. It never ends. If they truly believe humans are the problem, maybe they will volunteer to take the place of all the cattle they want to get rid of seeing how they have a lot of gas coming out of both ends, right? We could call it research in the name of global warming. Just a thought. We would sure fix a lot of problems and do something positive for the environment. It's a win, win.
Even if what you're told about climate change were true. If something similar has happened hundreds of times in the past, it's never happened because of man made items. When we no longer have an atmosphere protecting our planet, we no longer have life. If you think your convoluted logic is true, then how is it that you're planning on replacing our atmosphere?
You seriously have to complain about a warning label on a lawn mower!?!?!?! First off, how is that label changing your life? That label isn't there because someone came up with an idea that someone might purposely stick their arms or legs through the discharge hole, while it was running. It's there because SOMEONE DID LOSE AN ARM OR LEG because of that. Without that label there, the manufacturer gets sued for millions of dollars, everytime a Republican does that. With the label there, they cover their @$$. More convoluted logic.
A few examples:
1960's....Oil gone in 10 years.
1970's....Another ice age in 10 years.
1980's....Acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years.
1990's....The ozone layer will be gone in 10 years.
2000......Ice caps will be gone in 10 years.
Is the sky really falling? I've seen a few rainbows, but it must be the climate scam is why I have not seen any polar bears or unicorns...
The oceans are rising, and beachfront property should be really cheap...it's a buyers market...keep drinking the koolaid...
Dave Coots
It's the coldest Caucus on record. It might be a little difficult to convince those of us who are not wack jobs about the urgency of climate change. It's definitely not the greatest threat to this country.