HOLLYWOOD STOCK EXCHANGE
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
CNN Isn't much better
Listening to all the complaints about global warming made me think of the EPA. It seems to me that these bigger and better storms began after the EPA was created in 1977. I've never heard of the EPA talking about finding a balance. The EPA is about reducing pollution. It sounds like a great thing. Clean air. Safer environment. But are they going about it in an effective manner.
You guys may know some of the things I've posted about asteroid, impacts, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc., and if you checked into some of the things I've posted, you've seen some pretty cool things, and may not think I'm totally insane. I realize nothing I've posted proves anything, but they were interesting facts. I refuse to use the word coinsidence as a description.
Well, I'm back with another idea. I have nothing to back up my claims. No orbit diagrams, no fireball videos, not USGS tables, just an opinion. So, be patient, I don;t have a picture with 1000's of words. This time it's about global warming and the EPA. As I said above, I never heard the EPA or environmentalist talk about finding a balance. They always discuss pollution reduction.
There are 2 types of atmospheric pollution. Gaseous pollution like CFC's, CO2, SO4, and Particle pollutions like dust, ash, heavy metals and others. These two pollutions do different things.
The gaseous pollutions are said to cause a greenhouse effect where the gases create a barrier not allowing excess heat to escape back into space. I'm sure gaseous pollution does other thing too.
The particle pollution acts as a seed. This seed collects water vapor. Sometimes enough water collect around a particle that it's heavy enough to fall as rain or snow or hail.When this happens, the air after the storm is clean and fresh.
Sometimes, there is some much particle pollution, that only small amount of water is available per particle and it never becomes heavy enough to fall as rain, snow, or hail. When this happens, the particle acts like a mirror. This mirror reflects light and heat back into space.
If this mirror is too small, it may allow axcess heat to enter the atmosphere and the gaseous pollution won't let the excess heat escape back into space. Thus temperature rise.
If the mirror is too large, not enough light and heat enters the atmosphere and it gets colder simply due to the lack of heat.
So, I say a balance of gaseous and particle pollution is needed. Won't ever happen, but it's a sound opinion. If a balance was achieved the atmosphere would cool enough over the long term to stop or slow the effects of global warming.
This is where the EPA comes in. Instead of focusing on only reduction of pollution, a better idea is to look at finding balance. If global warming solely on the shoulders of man, then the EPA is accerating global warming's effect on the climate. The EPA requires gas emmissions and particle pollution to be reduced. Recuding particle pollution may create a smaller mirror allowing more heat to enter the atmosphere.
I'm happy with my understanding. Maybe at some point I will be better able to describe my opinion and back it up with solid facts. One thing is for sure and proven. Since the inception of the EPA and lead reduction in gasoline, the storms, hurricane and change in climates has become more noticable after only 35 years. IMHO
It's time to get the lead back in...
Sadly, the NBC nightly news looks like a half-hour promotion for RVOLUT {nm} Nov 01, 16:03
CNN Isn't much better Nov 02, 02:58
