What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General
General Discussion
50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PrairieGhost" data-source="post: 346218" data-attributes="member: 704"><p><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> What kind of cameras were they using 1000 years ago? </p><p></p><p>I get your points, but glaciers over thousands of years grow and receed. Absolutely man has contributed, but I doubt they have good reliable data on the amount of affect. I know they old Earth's Resources Technology satalite, and more recently the German satalite monitoring atmospheric co2 watch it disappear as it passes North Dakota. We have looked at every habitat and found that it's our Prairie wetlands that are sucking up co2. They can store as high as 32 tons per acre. As a conservationist (not a preservationist) I believe a federal program for restoring wetlands is a win win if you believe climate change or not. The benefits are an income for farmers on marginal or problem lands, habitat for wildlife ( not only Ducks but for example thermal cover for deer and pheasants)Pheasants, restoration of the aquifer (which is documented), reduction in flooding downstream, and if you believe climate change then sequestration of co2. We through the idea out yeasrs ago of a carbon market where farmers would get paid for carbon storage, and if someone needed to drain a wetland he could purchase carbon credits from the market who would in turn use that money to pay farmers who were storing carbon.</p><p></p><p>A program such as I outlined has many benefits so it would not be looked at as a waste by those who don't believe in climate change. I am sure man contributes, but our asestors heated with wood, and I think a few million campfires gave off some carbon. I also think nature is going to cyclical warm and cool even if man is extinct. I'm all for wetland preservation because if global climate change is caused by man then we have mitigated for it, and if man has little effect then we still receive benefits and bang for our buck.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PrairieGhost, post: 346218, member: 704"] :) What kind of cameras were they using 1000 years ago? I get your points, but glaciers over thousands of years grow and receed. Absolutely man has contributed, but I doubt they have good reliable data on the amount of affect. I know they old Earth's Resources Technology satalite, and more recently the German satalite monitoring atmospheric co2 watch it disappear as it passes North Dakota. We have looked at every habitat and found that it's our Prairie wetlands that are sucking up co2. They can store as high as 32 tons per acre. As a conservationist (not a preservationist) I believe a federal program for restoring wetlands is a win win if you believe climate change or not. The benefits are an income for farmers on marginal or problem lands, habitat for wildlife ( not only Ducks but for example thermal cover for deer and pheasants)Pheasants, restoration of the aquifer (which is documented), reduction in flooding downstream, and if you believe climate change then sequestration of co2. We through the idea out yeasrs ago of a carbon market where farmers would get paid for carbon storage, and if someone needed to drain a wetland he could purchase carbon credits from the market who would in turn use that money to pay farmers who were storing carbon. A program such as I outlined has many benefits so it would not be looked at as a waste by those who don't believe in climate change. I am sure man contributes, but our asestors heated with wood, and I think a few million campfires gave off some carbon. I also think nature is going to cyclical warm and cool even if man is extinct. I'm all for wetland preservation because if global climate change is caused by man then we have mitigated for it, and if man has little effect then we still receive benefits and bang for our buck. [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
Bismarck roads and driving
Latest: Davey Crockett
Today at 6:28 AM
Riddle Me This.....
Latest: CatDaddy
Today at 12:29 AM
Israel
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 9:57 PM
I Love This Bar (NDA)
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 8:58 PM
Answer me this
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 8:49 PM
NFL News (Vikings)
Latest: Obi-Wan
Yesterday at 8:28 PM
Quiet Pellet Gun
Latest: 3Roosters
Yesterday at 5:26 PM
More CWD NE ND
Latest: Fritz the Cat
Yesterday at 12:57 PM
Coffee and sweet beaver
Latest: Maddog
Yesterday at 10:59 AM
Presidents who added the most
Latest: grumster
Yesterday at 12:01 AM
F
Drotto adjustment?
Latest: Fester
Friday at 8:41 PM
Check your bags boys
Latest: svnmag
Friday at 8:27 PM
Tractors
Latest: Davey Crockett
Friday at 11:15 AM
8
Spring snows 24
Latest: 870XPRS
Thursday at 10:14 PM
R
Tract Optics
Latest: rodcontrol
Thursday at 2:22 PM
Any Birders here?
Latest: svnmag
Wednesday at 8:59 PM
Prairie ghost
Latest: johnr
Wednesday at 4:20 PM
S
Mega Live
Latest: SLE
Wednesday at 2:12 PM
G
A good movie
Latest: gillraker
Wednesday at 9:53 AM
Skinwalker Ranch
Latest: svnmag
Tuesday at 10:16 PM
Friends of NDA
Forums
General
General Discussion
50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions
Top
Bottom