It's known that a warmer planet is a wetter planet as we are seeing with global warming and the shrinking of the Sahara. More heat = More evaporation of ocean waters = More humidity = More rainfall http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne... I wonder if continued recycling of CO2 back into the atmosphere will increase Southern California's rainfall in the near future or do we have to output a lot more.
Should we find a way to increase the amount of CO2 in the air to make the rain forests grow back faster? We are only at 300-400 part per million (ppm) of Co2 in our air vs the dinosaur age when it was closer to 4000ppm which made it possible for lush rain forests to cover the earth from pole to pole which lead to animals to grow to such large sizes. http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/dinosau... http://www.palaeobiology.org.uk/proje... It would be costly for humans as we lose our coastal cities but the end result would be a rich, forest covered Eden of a green planet once again. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...
To what end are we conserving? If San Diego population doubles will we have to use half of the amount of conserved water that we are using now? What is being done to increase our need for water for now and for the future population of San Diego/Southern California? Conservation should not be the answer it should be only a delaying action until we get a solution, which of course is more water.
We should compare using California labor with the their labor union with outsourcing the prisoners to China/India/Russia/Turkey/North Korea/etc.. prisons and go with whoever is cheapest. When countries compete for our business California wins. We could save tons of money. Also, instead of being a badge of honor, we should make it humiliating to go to prison to discourage people from going back. Maybe they can all wear pink bunny suits with their feet chained together so that they have to hop everywhere to get around. This may also reduce prison violence if they can't get around as quickly.
Can we reduce prison population by sending letting the military use them as laborers in Afghanistan? Maybe they can be used for loading, unloading the huge amount of supplies needed for the troops? I'm sure there are a great many other things that they can help out there. They will be in a place that prevents them from harming US citizens, they will be surrounded by armed soldiers trained to use lethal force, they have no place to escape, and it will reduce the cost of the war by getting free labor. Seems like a win win
511: Sarah Conner was human. She gave birth to John Connor who leads humans to victory against the robots. They also were not made in that fashion. The 800 series models(Schwarzenegger) were metal exoskeleton frames with organic skin over them. The T-1000's were just all metal.
Cars are continuously getting increased robot like features. They can take over your car to parallel park, they can hit the breaks if they see that you are going to hit the car in front of you. Eventually more and more driving will be done by the computers in our cars. And of course someday they will just drive for us, which much like robot soldiers, will greatly reduce the amount of deaths.
I'm not sure what you are talking about with answering machines but they are pretty much on their way out. More and more people today have cell phones as their only phone. Voice messages can be accessed by them without the need for an actual physical answering machine.
War is always an unfortunate event. It should always be treated as the last option when all else fails. Telling an African country to stop the mass killings, rape and genocide and them not listening nor stopping when you try everything else can unfortunately lead to military intervention to protect the victims. If we were to get into such a situation then it would be very nice to send in the remote controlled robot army to greatly reduce collateral damage and not have any of our people die.
Soldiers are trained to follow orders without question or individual thought. This might not always be the case but it is what the military wants out of soldiers. Sometimes rogue soldiers can do good things by disobeying and sometimes they can do very bad things by disobeying. With remote controlled robots taking the place of soldiers accountability will fall directly onto the person who is controlling the robot. Did something questionable happen in that last skirmish with the enemy? Replay the video footage that was used to control the robot! If crimes were committed then justice will quickly prevail. In conventional warfare soldiers who are accused of killing the innocent are put into a position of their word vs ours. If we had the choice to use human guided kamakazi bombs and missiles or use remotely controlled bombs and missiles what should we choose? Should we choose the human guided bombs because remotely controlled bombs are heartless? I say no. If we have to fight a war then lets us do it in the best way that limits the blood of our soldiers. If we can take them out of the line of fire then we should.
As long as there are people on the planet there will be wars. As it stands right now wars cost lives. We spend so much to protect our troop by training, increasing body armor, increased mine screening etc. The best protection would be to take them out of the line of fire completely. Our country should make it top priority to create armies of robot soldiers. First they should be remote controlled via satellite where much our soldiers can control them remotely from a safe location such as within our borders. Later as technology gets better we can think about automating them. For now though the generation growing up with video games will easily be able to control these robots and the interface will not be so much different. They will not have to fear getting killed which will make them less prone to have accidents due to fear. Because of their calmness they will be able to make less mistakes which will greatly reduce collateral damage, friendly fire will be greatly reduced, and PTSD will be a thing of the past. Robot armies will be able to be quickly deployed to remote locations to suppress things such as terrorist camps and areas of where mass genocide is being committed.
If they start a public health care then I say that all politicians that are government paid should by law not be allowed to have private health care so that they will be forced to use only public health. That way any problems that might arise from the new system they will experience first hand and thus will be more inclined to fix.
It’s funny that someone would mention sequoia trees and another would mention that 50% of species will become extinct in our lifetime due to human activity. I’m sure that you are all aware that the majority of those species that will become extinct are plants and insects and not mammals. That in itself brings to light the importance of insect being compared to mammal. It shows that humans as a species takes preference on anything mammal over insect, plant, reptile, etc. If an insect infests a manmade structure like a home, school, store or whatever we get rid of them. If it is mammal we consider them jewels of nature to be viewed with our children. Be consistent people. If you are for nature among us then you have to be for all nature and not just pick and choose the cute ones and reject the ugly. Maybe the vast majority of species on that extinction list, which are made up of non-cute creatures, would not be going extinct if we even gave them the smallest percentage of the protection that we give “cute” animals that are not even remotely in danger of becoming extinct. You cannot get rid of one type of creature from a man made structure and keep another just because it is cute, you have to be consistent. Either accept all comers in the animal kingdom into everything that we build or keep all of them all from moving in. Like I said before it is only a matter of time before the seals are removed after X amount of tourist get attacked by sharks so all this debating is for naught but please, no more hypocritical talk about living with nature and sharing the place we live with nature when to you nature only means mammals that you think are cute and not the rest nature. Accept the roaches in your home and the seals at the man made children’s pool or keep the roaches out and kick out the seal infestation.
Listen
Local Conservation Efforts Lead To Easing Of Water Restrictions
It's known that a warmer planet is a wetter planet as we are seeing with global warming and the shrinking of the Sahara. More heat = More evaporation of ocean waters = More humidity = More rainfall
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...
I wonder if continued recycling of CO2 back into the atmosphere will increase Southern California's rainfall in the near future or do we have to output a lot more.
October 22, 2009 at 1:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Amazon Scientist Discusses Work With Indigenous Tribes, Saving Rainforest
Should we find a way to increase the amount of CO2 in the air to make the rain forests grow back faster? We are only at 300-400 part per million (ppm) of Co2 in our air vs the dinosaur age when it was closer to 4000ppm which made it possible for lush rain forests to cover the earth from pole to pole which lead to animals to grow to such large sizes.
http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/dinosau...
http://www.palaeobiology.org.uk/proje...
It would be costly for humans as we lose our coastal cities but the end result would be a rich, forest covered Eden of a green planet once again.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...
October 22, 2009 at 10:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Local Conservation Efforts Lead To Easing Of Water Restrictions
To what end are we conserving? If San Diego population doubles will we have to use half of the amount of conserved water that we are using now? What is being done to increase our need for water for now and for the future population of San Diego/Southern California? Conservation should not be the answer it should be only a delaying action until we get a solution, which of course is more water.
October 22, 2009 at 9:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
California Budget Held Captive By State Prisons
We should compare using California labor with the their labor union with outsourcing the prisoners to China/India/Russia/Turkey/North Korea/etc.. prisons and go with whoever is cheapest. When countries compete for our business California wins. We could save tons of money.
Also, instead of being a badge of honor, we should make it humiliating to go to prison to discourage people from going back. Maybe they can all wear pink bunny suits with their feet chained together so that they have to hop everywhere to get around. This may also reduce prison violence if they can't get around as quickly.
October 5, 2009 at 9:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Calif. Lawmakers Debate Ways to Reduce Prison Population
Can we reduce prison population by sending letting the military use them as laborers in Afghanistan? Maybe they can be used for loading, unloading the huge amount of supplies needed for the troops? I'm sure there are a great many other things that they can help out there. They will be in a place that prevents them from harming US citizens, they will be surrounded by armed soldiers trained to use lethal force, they have no place to escape, and it will reduce the cost of the war by getting free labor. Seems like a win win
September 4, 2009 at 10:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pros and Cons of Robotic Warfare
511:
Sarah Conner was human. She gave birth to John Connor who leads humans to victory against the robots. They also were not made in that fashion. The 800 series models(Schwarzenegger) were metal exoskeleton frames with organic skin over them. The T-1000's were just all metal.
Cars are continuously getting increased robot like features. They can take over your car to parallel park, they can hit the breaks if they see that you are going to hit the car in front of you. Eventually more and more driving will be done by the computers in our cars. And of course someday they will just drive for us, which much like robot soldiers, will greatly reduce the amount of deaths.
I'm not sure what you are talking about with answering machines but they are pretty much on their way out. More and more people today have cell phones as their only phone. Voice messages can be accessed by them without the need for an actual physical answering machine.
War is always an unfortunate event. It should always be treated as the last option when all else fails. Telling an African country to stop the mass killings, rape and genocide and them not listening nor stopping when you try everything else can unfortunately lead to military intervention to protect the victims. If we were to get into such a situation then it would be very nice to send in the remote controlled robot army to greatly reduce collateral damage and not have any of our people die.
September 2, 2009 at 2:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pros and Cons of Robotic Warfare
Soldiers are trained to follow orders without question or individual thought. This might not always be the case but it is what the military wants out of soldiers. Sometimes rogue soldiers can do good things by disobeying and sometimes they can do very bad things by disobeying. With remote controlled robots taking the place of soldiers accountability will fall directly onto the person who is controlling the robot. Did something questionable happen in that last skirmish with the enemy? Replay the video footage that was used to control the robot! If crimes were committed then justice will quickly prevail.
In conventional warfare soldiers who are accused of killing the innocent are put into a position of their word vs ours.
If we had the choice to use human guided kamakazi bombs and missiles or use remotely controlled bombs and missiles what should we choose? Should we choose the human guided bombs because remotely controlled bombs are heartless? I say no. If we have to fight a war then lets us do it in the best way that limits the blood of our soldiers. If we can take them out of the line of fire then we should.
September 2, 2009 at 10:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pros and Cons of Robotic Warfare
As long as there are people on the planet there will be wars. As it stands right now wars cost lives. We spend so much to protect our troop by training, increasing body armor, increased mine screening etc. The best protection would be to take them out of the line of fire completely. Our country should make it top priority to create armies of robot soldiers. First they should be remote controlled via satellite where much our soldiers can control them remotely from a safe location such as within our borders. Later as technology gets better we can think about automating them. For now though the generation growing up with video games will easily be able to control these robots and the interface will not be so much different. They will not have to fear getting killed which will make them less prone to have accidents due to fear. Because of their calmness they will be able to make less mistakes which will greatly reduce collateral damage, friendly fire will be greatly reduced, and PTSD will be a thing of the past.
Robot armies will be able to be quickly deployed to remote locations to suppress things such as terrorist camps and areas of where mass genocide is being committed.
September 1, 2009 at 10:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Officials: Health Care Proposal 'A Work In Progress'
If they start a public health care then I say that all politicians that are government paid should by law not be allowed to have private health care so that they will be forced to use only public health. That way any problems that might arise from the new system they will experience first hand and thus will be more inclined to fix.
July 20, 2009 at 4:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Seal Legislation Passes Calif. Assembly
It’s funny that someone would mention sequoia trees and another would mention that 50% of species will become extinct in our lifetime due to human activity. I’m sure that you are all aware that the majority of those species that will become extinct are plants and insects and not mammals. That in itself brings to light the importance of insect being compared to mammal. It shows that humans as a species takes preference on anything mammal over insect, plant, reptile, etc. If an insect infests a manmade structure like a home, school, store or whatever we get rid of them. If it is mammal we consider them jewels of nature to be viewed with our children. Be consistent people. If you are for nature among us then you have to be for all nature and not just pick and choose the cute ones and reject the ugly. Maybe the vast majority of species on that extinction list, which are made up of non-cute creatures, would not be going extinct if we even gave them the smallest percentage of the protection that we give “cute” animals that are not even remotely in danger of becoming extinct. You cannot get rid of one type of creature from a man made structure and keep another just because it is cute, you have to be consistent. Either accept all comers in the animal kingdom into everything that we build or keep all of them all from moving in.
Like I said before it is only a matter of time before the seals are removed after X amount of tourist get attacked by sharks so all this debating is for naught but please, no more hypocritical talk about living with nature and sharing the place we live with nature when to you nature only means mammals that you think are cute and not the rest nature. Accept the roaches in your home and the seals at the man made children’s pool or keep the roaches out and kick out the seal infestation.
July 12, 2009 at 1:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )