So what can we do about Global Warming?

[USMC the Almighty]

Let's leave the other thread to discussions on humans effect on global warming/whether its something to be concered about.

Assume for a minute that global warming is occuring. Okay. So what do we do to stop it?

Kyoto's a joke and everyone knows it. Even advocates of Kyoto admit that if all nations signed the agreement and obeyed it, it would affect global temperatures by less than a tenth of a degree. Certainly not worth economic disaster.

The bottom line is this. While Gore and everyone else is so consumed in global warming and pretending to be environmentalists, real environmental harms are occurring. How many children in third world countries die from water pollution? How many people die due to the burning of bio fuels indoors to keep warm. Millions! And you are worried about something that might or might not happen.

Instead of all this hollering and waste of money on the phony cures and plans they should look at and talk about the realities. They keep on the doomsday path and some nut might come to a conclusion that the best thing to do is reduce the population back down to the level it was at in about 1800.

Meanwhile, the rest of us know that the earth is going to take care of itself.

[Sgt Schultz]

The earth will always take care of itself, but that doesn't mean it's going to take care of humanity.

[Rokerijdude11]

The earth will always take care of itself, but that doesn't mean it's going to take care of humanity.

excellent point

[9sublime]

I think its too late to be honest. I think its not the generations alive now, but two or so generations down the line who are really going to get screwed over by all this. Sure, we are seeing some quick changes on glaciers, in desert cities and on the coral reef, but thats only going to be the start at this rate. If everyone parked their car, cut off their electricty and lived like that we would have a chance, but its not going to happen and I'm not saying I would be up for doing it either.

[Rokerijdude11]

Id pretty well have to agree unless we are willing as you say to cease most of our daily activities and substitute clean energy in its place the inevitable will happen regardless

probably as yousaid........ increasingly worsening over the next couple of decades, till it reaches its tip over point

[Dave]

I think its too late to be honest. I think its not the generations alive now, but two or so generations down the line who are really going to get screwed over by all this. Sure, we are seeing some quick changes on glaciers, in desert cities and on the coral reef, but thats only going to be the start at this rate. If everyone parked their car, cut off their electricty and lived like that we would have a chance, but its not going to happen and I'm not saying I would be up for doing it either.

Actually, those things would not really make a difference either. I'm not sure if you are in the camp that believes that cO2 emissions are to blame, but if you are, most scientists say that even if cO2 emissions were completely cut out today, they would still at least double before there is even a chance for a change. A lot of the methane and other "greenhouse gases" in our atmosphere come from simple decaying matter and natural causes that are out of our control. I tend to side with those that say that our global warming is caused by natural external factors, so I would say that there is not one thing we can do about global warming.

[Rokerijdude11]

Co2 emissions from animals, people, and rotting vegetation, is what CREATES Natural Global Warming!! Which is, and MUST always be, present,in order for the globe to be habitable.... Without solar radiance, and global warming, this would be a block of ice instead of a habitable planet



Increased Co2 only means that MORE solar radiance is TRAPPED within the atmosphere ....helping to warm things what is so difficult to admit about that

[9sublime]

The emissions from decaying animals forms part of the nitrogen and carbon cycles this planet relies on, and shouldn't cause any dramatic increase without human activity, but stay at a reasonably constant level.

I think that scientists may say its going to carry on going even if we turned everything off is because it has a delayed reaction to some extent (although I'm not quite sure), a bit like China's population. If they had instigated a 2 child policy, the population still would have rocketed for a while before getting smaller.

[mr universe]

how's this for simple things to do:

energy efficient light bulbs. You can get them cheaper than incandecents for your utility company, or if you're filthy rich, pay the two dollars for one, it saves you money on your electricity bill and less energy is consumed.

errands. do them all at once, make one large trip instead of five small ones. It will save you money on gas, as your engine is more effficient when it is warmed up.

Switch your energy sources. Your energy utility may or may not charge you a small amount to purchase your energy from green sources, like solar and wind, switching mine cost an extra five dollars a month.

recycle aluminium and plastics, easy one. you can even get paid for it, or let the county take care of it for you. Or find a homeless guy, he'll recycle them.

get your car tuned up and change the oil regularly. it wil extend the life of your car, and boost your energy efficiency.

turn off your lights when you're not in a room. saves you money.

turn off the tap when brushing your teeth. less water being treated means more energy for other things.

public transit. actually cheaper than a car if you factor in gas, wear and tear.


These are VERY eassy to do and most of these will save you money.

so if you don't believe humans are responsible for an accelerated greenhouse effect, at least these will save you money.

[mr universe]

i even did a search for you

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=easy+things+for+global+warming

[palerider]

Co2 emissions from animals, people, and rotting vegetation, is what CREATES Natural Global Warming!! Which is, and MUST always be, present,in order for the globe to be habitable.... Without solar radiance, and global warming, this would be a block of ice instead of a habitable planet

Increased Co2 only means that MORE solar radiance is TRAPPED within the atmosphere ....helping to warm things what is so difficult to admit about that

Increased CO2 lags behind rising temperatures. Increased CO2 is an effect, not a cause. Every scrap of ice core data that we have shows this. There is not one instance of rising CO2 levels preceeding a temperature rise.

[PLC1]

There is no doubt that the Earth is getting warmer, and very little doubt that the burning of fossil fuels is accelerating that warming. It's time to quit debating those two points. The jury is in, and CO2 has been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by everyone but the headinthesand crowd.


What can we do about it? Well, we could burn less fossil fuel. That seems to be the solution being promulgated by those who say that GW will be a disaster.

We don't know whether GW will be a disaster or not, but we do know that GWB was.

OK, so that was an uncalled for jab at the president that had nothing to do with the topic at hand. So sue me.:D

What would happen if we suddenly invented a practical cold fusion technology, and no longer needed to burn coal and oil? Would the Earth begin to cool down, or return to a preindustrial age climate?

No, of course not. The CO2 we've already put into the atmosphere would still be there. There is probably nothing we can do to stop GW (Though GWB will be gone soon, thank heavens), but we could slow it down by cutting back on emissions of greenhouse gasses.

Now, the unanswered question is this:

Is it worth it to limit burning of coal and oil, or to try to sequester carbon dioxide?

I don't know the answer to that one, and neither do you. How much would it cost to cut back? How practical and expensive is carbon sequestration? How much effect would such moves have? What problems will be caused by GW in the future?

We could argue about the answers to that one all day, and never accomplish anything. I don't know the answers, and neither does anyone else.

No, not even Al Gore nor Rush Limbaugh, nor anyone on this forum.

One thing is for sure, and that is that there will be money made and money lost on trying to solve the problem of global climate change. Money, not reason nor technology will be the driving force behind any efforts that might be made to counter GCC (Global Climate Change, a much more accurate term for what is happening than GW, but not one that lends itself to unwarranted jabs at the current president.)

My opinion is that we need to concentrate our efforts on apolitical research into just what changes are likely to occur, and then make decisions based on reason and fact. Unfortunately, the history of mankind has few instances of basing major decisions on reason and fact, as opposed to emotion and partisanship, but we can always hope.

[DrWho]

how's this for simple things to do:

energy efficient light bulbs. You can get them cheaper than incandecents for your utility company, or if you're filthy rich, pay the two dollars for one, it saves you money on your electricity bill and less energy is consumed.

errands. do them all at once, make one large trip instead of five small ones. It will save you money on gas, as your engine is more effficient when it is warmed up.

Switch your energy sources. Your energy utility may or may not charge you a small amount to purchase your energy from green sources, like solar and wind, switching mine cost an extra five dollars a month.

recycle aluminium and plastics, easy one. you can even get paid for it, or let the county take care of it for you. Or find a homeless guy, he'll recycle them.

get your car tuned up and change the oil regularly. it wil extend the life of your car, and boost your energy efficiency.

turn off your lights when you're not in a room. saves you money.

turn off the tap when brushing your teeth. less water being treated means more energy for other things.

public transit. actually cheaper than a car if you factor in gas, wear and tear.


These are VERY eassy to do and most of these will save you money.

so if you don't believe humans are responsible for an accelerated greenhouse effect, at least these will save you money.

Bury every organic thing we can. All our organic garbage, organic recycling, lawn clippings, yard waste, old wood, etc. - deep.

A pound of burried carbon will do much more than not wasting water while brushing teeth.

Hey while were at it let's go looking for carbon to bury. I bet we can find it all over the place. We could completely offset our carbon emmissions and more.

[palerider]

There is no doubt that the Earth is getting warmer, and very little doubt that the burning of fossil fuels is accelerating that warming. It's time to quit debating those two points. The jury is in, and CO2 has been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by everyone but the headinthesand crowd.

If the jury is in, and has found that CO2 is guilty, then the jury has completely disregarded the physical evidence. There isn't a single bit of physical, observable, evidence that shows that CO2 is responsible for raising the earth's temperature. Every bit of evidence collected, shows clearly that rising CO2 levels lag behind temperature increases.

We are in the relatively early stages of a natural warming cycle that will eventually melt the ice at both poles. When this warming period began, glaciers extended over most of the northern hemisphere. Tell me, Mr. Judge and jury, exactly who was responsible for melting the ice back over 2000 miles before we ever got out of the bronze age?

[JavaBlack]

Reducing the human-caused portion of global warming is a good idea... but it is far from being all we must do. The process is irreversible... It can only be slowed to the point that we can catch up.
To catch up we must deal with the problems... dying crops from change in environment and flooding from rise of oceans.
I think the former won't be too hard in this day and age. Surely we can build climate-controlled greenhouses for plants and we can genetically alter plants.
The latter... That's tough. The worst case scenario: evacuate our most populous and richest cities and rebuild them from the ground up?!
I think that maybe we might be able to build a device that reflects sunlight from the polar ice caps... maybe.
Or how about this? Water desalinization. It's how Saudi Arabia gets most of its drinking water.
If we make a more efficient form of such machines, mass produce them and export them around the world...
This kills two birds with one stone. It creates a water supply that is pretty much inexhaustable (the oceans)... and it creates an incentive to store lots of ocean water... Perhaps if used around the world, the ocean levels will drop enough that the melting polar ice caps will not flood us.

Maybe. I'm really grasping here.

[palerider]

Reducing the human-caused portion of global warming is a good idea... but it is far from being all we must do. The process is irreversible... It can only be slowed to the point that we can catch up.
To catch up we must deal with the problems... dying crops from change in environment and flooding from rise of oceans.

The ice has melted back over 2,000 miles and sea levels have risen almost 1000 feet. Exactly what do you think that we can do to stave off such a warming trend?

The earth is going to warm to a mean average of close to 22degrees C whether we like it or not because that is what it does. If you look at the history of the earth, the very existance of ice is the anomoly, not the norm.

[PLC1]

If the jury is in, and has found that CO2 is guilty, then the jury has completely disregarded the physical evidence. There isn't a single bit of physical, observable, evidence that shows that CO2 is responsible for raising the earth's temperature. Every bit of evidence collected, shows clearly that rising CO2 levels lag behind temperature increases.

We are in the relatively early stages of a natural warming cycle that will eventually melt the ice at both poles. When this warming period began, glaciers extended over most of the northern hemisphere. Tell me, Mr. Judge and jury, exactly who was responsible for melting the ice back over 2000 miles before we ever got out of the bronze age?

Yes, I've read that same opinion expressed on several occasions. Just like your post, there never is any credible backup, just a factless opinion.

[palerider]

Yes, I've read that same opinion expressed on several occasions. Just like your post, there never is any credible backup, just a factless opinion.

And you have never taken the time to actually check to see if it is true? You just assume that it is based on nothing? Is your failure to do even the smallest bit of research due to your being incredibly lazy or do you lack the intellectual wattage necessary to do even the simplest of searches? Here. It took about 3 minutes to come up with these.

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V6/N26/EDIT.jsp

http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/04/co2-lags-temperature-how-alarmists.html

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M

http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html

http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articles/2003/july_21_03.htm

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V8/N48/EDIT.jsp

If you need more, I can provide literally dozens of articles.

[Abraxis Axis]

the pompus azz once again resorts to insults and rant.
whats the matter pale cant formulate reponses that dont include arrogant demeaning insults? always the kettle calling the pot black with you eh?

some things will never change eh

[USMC the Almighty]

the pompus azz once again resorts to insults and rant.
whats the matter pale cant formulate reponses that dont include arrogant demeaning insults? always the kettle calling the pot black with you eh?

some things will never change eh

Roker, please try to refrain from posting unless it is going to contribute to the discussion.

[Abraxis Axis]

Roker, please try to refrain from posting unless it is going to contribute to the discussion.

roker didnt post anything? you on the sauce again?

[USMC the Almighty]

Seriously, if you're not going to add something meaningful, then don't post.. Otherwise, I'm going to have to delete your posts in order to prevent you from derailing every thread you touch.

[Mare Tranquillity]

speak..............free........america ............Dot .....Com

It appears the you are posting the same 5 word message on all the threads--is this supposed to have some significance for us?

[palerider]

the pompus azz once again resorts to insults and rant.
whats the matter pale cant formulate reponses that dont include arrogant demeaning insults? always the kettle calling the pot black with you eh?

some things will never change eh

Note, that I didn't resort to insulting him in lieu of making a valid argument as you and your alter ego roker do. I provided information that substantiates my point and goaded him for not taking the initiative to do some research on his own. That is called gamesmanship and is a perfectly valid tactic even in formal debate. I believe that people who are forever asking for information rather than taking the time to look it up on their own are genuinely stupid. As I recall, you are one who pipes up asking for links rather than researching on your own.

[palerider]

Seriously, if you're not going to add something meaningful, then don't post.. Otherwise, I'm going to have to delete your posts in order to prevent you from derailing every thread you touch.

You are asking too much of him. He is doing what he is capable of.

[Abraxis Axis]

as are you.........................

lots of hot wind and opinion not much fact though and a whole lot of name calling and insults

its your game pale everyone knows it i have peeps who come here just to read you arrogant tripe filled rants your somewhat of an illigitimate celebrity


i wasnt the one in the thread who was as usual insulting someone when i couldnt come up with a worthy reply\thats your whole game pale .....you have demonstrated it time and time again

and when it gets too hot for you................you conviently dissappear until people have lost interest on waiting for your responses ...you think your all that and thats where it ends YOU THINK is the key in that statement


carry on insult king

[Coyote]

Well...to be fair, I don't think "disappear" is a fair assessment. He kept on with the debate on stemcell research...and while I disagreed with his stance - he made good arguments which I was eventually unable to fully counter. I'll grant him that. Insults were quite mild compared to some like say Justinian.

[palerider]

lots of hot wind and opinion not much fact though and a whole lot of name calling and insults

Yep. That describes you to a "T".

its your game pale everyone knows it i have peeps who come here just to read you arrogant tripe filled rants your somewhat of an illigitimate celebrity

I have no game. I come here to discuss issues. I note that you don't challenge me head to head on anything since you got your clock cleaned on the drug issue. Sniping from the sidelines. That is your game.


i wasnt the one in the thread who was as usual insulting someone when i couldnt come up with a worthy reply\thats your whole game pale .....you have demonstrated it time and time again

Neither was I. I made a valid point and backed it up with plenty of valid science. I don't expect that you woud understand it, but it is there if you care to attempt some research. What I have demonstrated is an ability to win discussions and what you have demonstrated is an ability to do no more than snipe from the sidelines under two names.

and when it gets too hot for you................you conviently dissappear until people have lost interest on waiting for your responses ...you think your all that and thats where it ends YOU THINK is the key in that statement

Exactly what is the point of your impotent rant? If you believe that you can win this discussion, then bring it on rather than mewl from the sidelines.

[palerider]

Well...to be fair, I don't think "disappear" is a fair assessment. He kept on with the debate on stemcell research...and while I disagreed with his stance - he made good arguments which I was eventually unable to fully counter. I'll grant him that. Insults were quite mild compared to some like say Justinian.


roker and his alter ego are intimidated by me for some unknown reason. He follows me around sniping from the sidelines as if that constituted some sort of actual argument. Sad and pitiful, but it is his lot in life.

[Abraxis Axis]

who was it that lost theyre ass on the drug issue?

[palerider]

who was it that lost theyre ass on the drug issue?

You roker. Claiming that drugs are perfectly harmless using 100 year old research and the word of an uneducated doper.

[Coyote]

I'll admit I didn't and don't follow the drug issue - it's not an issue that I've ever been really concerned about. :?

[Rokerijdude11]

Pale rider assumes once again that his opinions in the marijuana legalization thread somehow counted as actual facts. i presented him with far too much factual information for him to ingest over a week so he instead threw out his opinions as facts

as well he STATED HIMSELF that he somehow somewhere had proven some of what Jak Herer written was WRONG....He as well claimed to contact Jack herer with this proof in order to collect the 100 grand offered by Jack


problem being it never happened....he was asked by several members here to simply provide the transcripts of the proof that was sent off to Mr. Herer re repeatedly ignored the requests


he repeatedly ingored requests for ANY documentation to support his OPINIONS whe you are in the news for having collected 100 grand we will know for sure you proved something wrong


but beingthat i personally know Jack and have been keeping tabs on this issue.............Palerider is a KNOWN LIAR..he hasnt any proof of anything he is full of opinion and pomp but beyond that NATTA zip



you did in FACT insult the poster in this thread as you continue to do on a daily basis to anyone who make you have to think.........it is your Game and yes you do come to Play it here


the point of outing you is obvious to all of course but you

[Rokerijdude11]

You roker. Claiming that drugs are perfectly harmless using 100 year old research and the word of an uneducated doper.

NO NO NO palerider get it right for one frigging time can you do that? is it frigging possible?

I CLEARLY STATED THAT MARIJUANA was not harmful not "DRUGS" as you project in your misleading statement but then that is another of your hallmarks isnt it? putting words in peoples mouths


to this DATE you have YET to provide any factual data that you have been repeatedly asked for all you have been able to muster was a simple blanket statement any 5th grade dare student could have parroted

"there is a growing body of evidence"


yet you cant seem to produce it? and your still not the recipient of the 100 grand are ya big guy???

no didnt think so

nice try

[Rokerijdude11]

I'll admit I didn't and don't follow the drug issue - it's not an issue that I've ever been really concerned about. :?

It wasnt a "Drug" issue he is misleading you all by stating something i never said

the discussion was MARIJUANA


not all Drugs you need to watch what and how he speaks

[Rokerijdude11]

uneducated doper huh?


then collecting the 100 grand should be a cakewalk for such an educated shill as yourself?


why havent you?



wheres your BOOK to prove it all wrong?


your out of your league boy

[palerider]

Pale rider assumes once again that his opinions in the marijuana legalization thread somehow counted as actual facts. i presented him with far too much factual information for him to ingest over a week so he instead threw out his opinions as facts

You provided what might have been considered fact 50 years ago since that was the average age of your reference material.

Just to refresh your memory, here were the first of the sources I provided:

http://www.cannabisclub.ca/articles/...l_lancet_1.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/1999/...pot991217.html

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/c...act/90/16/1198

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/con...ract/8/12/1071

http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/83/4/637.pdf


You do like to go on about how I divert topics. The topic on this thread is global warming. Do you have anything to contribute or not. You claim that the sources I provide are not factual. Prove it. Or are you going to continue to divert the topic on this thread?

[Rokerijdude11]

NOne of your links have any CONCLUSIVE evidence alot of coulds maybes in some cases etc.....

nothing near concrete

i will clearly ask you one last time can you provide


1. the EXACT part of what Jack Herer authored that you CLAIM to have proven worng

2. the proof to substantiate your Claim ....supported by conclusive evidence


3. the transcripts of the information you supposedly sent to Mr Herer


4. ANY .........ANY transcript of acknowledgement that Mr Herer has EVER even spoken to you on the issue


who was it that spun the thread down this direction pal?


thats right YOU


well sisnce we all know your unable to answer the 4 questions i suppose we are finished

[Rokerijdude11]

You provided what might have been considered fact 50 years ago since that was the average age of your reference material.

Just to refresh your memory, here were the first of the sources I provided:

http://www.cannabisclub.ca/articles/...l_lancet_1.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/1999/...pot991217.html

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/c...act/90/16/1198

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/con...ract/8/12/1071

http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/83/4/637.pdf


You do like to go on about how I divert topics. The topic on this thread is global warming. Do you have anything to contribute or not. You claim that the sources I provide are not factual. Prove it. Or are you going to continue to divert the topic on this thread?
BTW

the 50 year old part of my information was the part of it that lays out the way they were able to orchestrate PROHIBITION of Marijuana BY LIES and decieit

that did in fact start in 1937

i have implored you to start there several times and yet you go on aand on about "DRUGS" we are talking HEMP/Marijuana is that so hard for you to sepearate?
when you want to start at the beginnings of the Prohibitoon and lies we can start right in 1937


you have YET to start at the beginning why?> because your UNABLE to refute the information plain and simple
when you are ready to start at 1937 you let me know Mr DRUGS

[Rokerijdude11]

Yep. That describes you to a "T".



I have no game. I come here to discuss issues.


interesting then that you said this 2 posts above


is called gamesmanship






no insults in this either huh?
I believe that people who are forever asking for information rather than taking the time to look it up on their own are genuinely stupid.

my my funny if roker or abraxis made a blanket statement like that you ALL would assail him as you have demonstarted over the last 2 weeks yet ole palepuss and the mods say what they want when they want quite telling

pot meet kettle any time your ready the chapters are up nd posted we can start at chapter 1 if your up to it

[USMC the Almighty]

Roker, stop. You're just destroying yet another good thread.

[palerider]

NOne of your links have any CONCLUSIVE evidence alot of coulds maybes in some cases etc.....

And your 100 year old data upon which you made the claim that smoking pot was harmless did? :rolleyes:

[TVoffBrainOn]

so...marijuana is causing global warming? therefore, man smoking marijuana is causing global warming? im confused...:confused:

[palerider]

so...marijuana is causing global warming? therefore, man smoking marijuana is causing global warming? im confused...:confused:


He can't win a head to head debate on the thread where the topic is being discussed, so he goes about sniping at me from the sidelines for reasons that I am sure only he can explain.

[invest07]

I am Al Gore.........high priest and prophet of the Global Warming religion.

And I demand you pay tithes to me (by buying carbon credits).

The science is settled so there will be no further debate on this topic.

Worship me or you shall fry!!!

[PLC1]

BTW

the 50 year old part of my information was the part of it that lays out the way they were able to orchestrate PROHIBITION of Marijuana BY LIES and decieit

that did in fact start in 1937

i have implored you to start there several times and yet you go on aand on about "DRUGS" we are talking HEMP/Marijuana is that so hard for you to sepearate?
when you want to start at the beginnings of the Prohibitoon and lies we can start right in 1937


you have YET to start at the beginning why?> because your UNABLE to refute the information plain and simple
when you are ready to start at 1937 you let me know Mr DRUGS

Say, Roker the Toker, do you want to debate the topic at hand, or are your neurons so fried by cannabis that you can't think of anything else?

Palerider already shot down your silly assertion that pot is not harmful.
I already shot down that same assertion.
That debate is over. Now, how about global climate change? Are the glaciers really melting, or did some liberal socialistic scumbag Photoshop the images so that he could continue some nefarious plot?

[r0beph]

Say, Roker the Toker, do you want to debate the topic at hand, or are your neurons so fried by cannabis that you can't think of anything else?

Palerider already shot down your silly assertion that pot is not harmful.
I already shot down that same assertion.
That debate is over. Now, how about global climate change? Are the glaciers really melting, or did some liberal socialistic scumbag Photoshop the images so that he could continue some nefarious plot?

it was me I did it :(...the glacial melting photo was my entry into a fark photoshop contest several months ago. I never thought it'd create such controversy, I'm SO SORRY!

[PLC1]

it was me I did it :(...the glacial melting photo was my entry into a fark photoshop contest several months ago. I never thought it'd create such controversy, I'm SO SORRY!

Aha! So, what is your nefarious plot?

[Rokerijdude11]

Say, Roker the Toker, do you want to debate the topic at hand, or are your neurons so fried by cannabis that you can't think of anything else?

Typical of your Ilk .....pure drivel and insult.........the best you can muster eh? ...........move on it has no effects sorry pal?

Palerider already shot down your silly assertion that pot is not harmful.
I already shot down that same assertion.
That debate is over.
only in your feeble little mind

[OPGhostdog]

I CLEARLY STATED THAT MARIJUANA was not harmful not "DRUGS" as you project in your misleading statement but then that is another of your hallmarks isnt it? putting words in peoples mouths

I can not help but jump into debates like this. Especially when it
comes to drugs. I use my personal and professional training when
it comes to debating issues concerning drugs.

The word DRUGS itself speaks for itself, and that includes Weed.
Most drugs is a illegal substances that causes addictive behavior,
sleep disorders, change in eating habits, and to kill the pair or
become a mood mind alternating unbalance.

Now to return to this thread's topic. There is simple things that
we can do everyday to lower the global warning. Change the oil
in our automobiles, use low emission fuel, stop chain smoking in
open public places, and to you hip ass weed smokers.
Smoke your stuff indoors where no one else can smell or inhale
the smoke (I do not smoke the garbage).

I see people smoking weed when the wind is 50 mph what a
waste, and yet some seem to think smoking weed makes a person
look hipped. That's why I say its not what you do..its how you
do it, and acting and looking goofy is a damn shame.