Comments

The winds of change — 14 Comments

  1. Cow dung creates methane gas, which rises into the sky and causes the ozone layer to retch. However, farmers can harvest cow dung and use in Methane Digesters to provide renewable power for home cooking with gas ovens, or for generating electricity that can go into the power grid. This shows how an agribusiness farm in Florida is doing it:

    After the dung has finished producing methane what's left can then be used for compost. In India, hundreds of villages have household dung digesters made of cement (they look like giant bell jars) into which human and cow waste is poured regularly to create methane for pot cookery. Many other Indian villagers gather undigested cow patties and dig directly into the soil before the new growing season.

    However, methane also enters the biosphere when people fart. So we've got to persuade people to eat less beans since, as the expression goes, Beanz Meanz Farts. But organic bean growers are going to burp at that suggestion. The Church of Climate Change has its internal contradictions in addition to questionable data on extreme climate.

    • That is an eminently sensible suggestion.  Convert all our sewage works to methane production.  Kills two birds with one stone as it were.  What's more, the methane farms are a hell of a sight more sightly than those damn bird mincers which destroy the landscape.

      I do most of the cooking here at the manor and have a strange tendency to use a LOT of onions.  Suffice it to say we never need laxatives.  In fact between Herself and myself we probably produce enough wind power and methane to power the entire village.  Maybe I should turn it into a cottage industry?

      • Once again, GD, you've given a rational and well articulated argument as to why 'Big Bird' and Co. are quite literally a bunch of, ehm, windbags. And I suppose it's just a mere coincidence that the whole climate change collective has become a multi-billion industry?

  2. The business of the Arctic ice melting and the subsequent rise in sea levels submerging half the planet is something that has always puzzled me. If you fill a glass with ice, and then let it melt, does it overflow? I seem to recollect, in fact, from my distant past at school, that when water freezes, it expands. Which logic would dictate is a situation which is reversed when it melts. So where is all this water that will cause the biblical floods going to come from?

    • It's a bit late in the day for this, but here goes…

      A body floats if it displaces it's own mass of water [*eureka!*].  The mass of the iceberg equals the mass of liquid water required to make that iceberg.  OK so far?  Therefore when an iceberg melts, it replaces the ice with the same mass of water it originally displaced, therefore there is no net change in surface levels?

      The only way melting ice can affect surface levels is if it's non-floating ice, such as an ice cap or glaciers, which would amount to some rise in sea levels but nothing compared to the "whole Arctic melting" scenario they love scaring the sheeple with.

      Correct me if I'm wrong….

      • Crikey, GD, I'm impressed! Archimedes' principle already!

        Yes, of course there will be some above sea-level ice, but the bulk of it is below water level, and given the aforementioned fact that water increases in volume when it freezes means, as you say, that any sea level rise as a result of the polar caps melting will be minimal. In fact I would imagine that it would be no more than we get here in the virtually non-tidal Med when the barometric pressure drops and the sea level rises by as much as couple of feet.

  3. we have all been doomed tomorrow for the better part of 15 years now ? only retards believe this nonsense anymore and they arent worth the time of day 

    • It must be very frustrating for them for their predictions to be always wrong?  I suppose we must admire their tenacity in a mildly sympathetic way?  It's a bit like watching a parrot repeatedly attacking its reflections in a mirror?

  4. The Green movement started thus:

    As Chicken-licken was going one day to the wood, whack! an acorn fell from a tree on to his head. "Gracious goodness me!" said Chicken-licken, "the sky must have fallen; I must go and tell the King."

  5. Originally it was the religion of "Global warming" but since fat Al Gore's fake polar bears didn't all drown and the Globe isn't warming the religious order was changed to "climate change" I wish they would just cut to the chase and be a bit more honest as to the correct name of their religion, that is "Anything complicated made simple to scare people into giving up their freedom". Oh and their money, oops I think I hear old Al bellowing for more hookers and brie, boy he's a load, nice article and amen.

  6. what bugs me is they all fly to Paris ,Rio or whatever on their private jets with their entourages…you would think a more green way of doing it would be by doing it over this thing i believe they call the Interweb and stay at home I might just be able to believe the lying C'nts then….i did say might

    • I was just looking at the tank of a car that Obama arrived in. The carbon footprint of that yoke must be as big as Leitrim. Then there's the size of the jets to get them there and back.

Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting