SupremeLeader

Calm down Clive. And where did you dig up that magazine article.......1973. Weren't they still using leaded gas back then? And geez, that's the year I was born. Look at the data; it's selective. If the first graph showed the temperatures recorded over the last 100 years you would see an upward trend; you and I both know this. And you didn't address Exxon's research and the tobacco 'scientists'.......the biggest corporation in the world had to resort to using bunk science in it's arguments against climate change? The thing about the vast majority of science regarding climate change is that the studies are grant funded and peer reviewed at Universities. Scientific research in universities doesn't set out to prove something, it's function is to research the truth. Consulting firms on the other hand, are asked to prove something. A few great examples come to mind....like the firm hired by Telus to prove using cell phone while driving is safe. Exxon hired their scientists to prove global warming is false; they didn't hire them to report the data. To compare the money made by Gore or Suzuki to Exxon Mobil is ridiculous....seriously. My wife works in scientific research at the U of C, and my father-in-law is a PhD with his own lab and research funding. I have mentioned to both of them some of the arguments regarding grant funded scientific research and the idea, apparently, that the data is altered so that they can make money.....they always get a good laugh. You're a smart guy Clive as are a lot of people on this board, but none of you are climatologists. Who should I trust, a grant funded climatologist at a University, or a climatologist at a firm funded by oil companies???? By the way, if you want to make money as a climatologist you don't work in a public funded research institution, you work for a consulting firm hired by big oil. The one thing that is scary is the deniers are kind of building their own Jones town....stringing' people along until the final cup of purple kool aid. Unfortunately, climate change will effect food production in most of the poorer nations of the world, and it will displace an enormous amount of people; it's already happened to one island in the South pacific. I guess the thing that bothers me most is the shortsightedness of people in Alberta. When the deniers aren't plastering their nonsense all over the place, they're saying how global warming will be great for Canada......how selfish. Stay tuned.

I would venture to guess that the salaries are much fatter in all of the anti-environmental oil company funded lobby groups. On the other side of this issue, one can't deny the bias and incorrect data that has been pushed to debunk climate change. Exxon hired the same 'scientists' to disprove climate change as the tobacco companies did to disprove a cancer link to smoking; and there research has been completely discredited. Clive, c'mon..you can do better than Knappenberger? The consulting firm he is a part of is funded by fossil fuel companies.

So you support a business owner from one of the richest countries in the world who pays a tier, from one of poorer nations in the world a very tiny fraction of the price of the fly. Rich guy gets richer. Poor guy gets enough to feed his kids, and maybe buy a bike if he saves for a few years. And you get your flies for a good price. Good system......

Do you know what commercial tying does to your brain........

I think the outlook for urban gardens is not so bad as it seems. The 100 mile diet is hardly a 'feel good' statement; it is a fantastic concept and positive in so many ways. It encourages people to support their local economy and consider all of their decisions instead of making blind purchases. The 100 mile diet is also not some sort of strict regime...it is a philosophy to encourage people to consider the impact of their choices. Last year, I grew lettuce, arugala, and spinach indoors; enough to have salad almost every night. In the recent advances in energy efficient LED grow lights, the possibilities for urban gardens are going to really expand. I'm very excited. I had this discussion on this board before, but to reiterate, I grew so many vegetables this year I had trouble keeping up. I have given lots away which is a good thing in my opinion, food is a great gift. What I still have in storage could easily feed the members in our household for two months; this would mean eating canned beets, potatoes, zucchini, pumpkins etc. for a long time....but in an emergency we could easily survive from these items. Using your green space to produce food is great even if it's a small amount and it is a healthy way to eat. Grass on the other hand is not so healthy; that said there are methods to extract some pretty interesting drugs from lawn clippings. I am really into urban gardening and I consider myself to be quite skilled at it; it is serious work and you need to be devoted to your project. It is not a novelty or something you work on once in a while. I do agree with you Clive in many ways, but I think you're being a little pessimistic. The 100 mile diet / Urban gardening is not for everyone, but it can be a viable, healthy, and certainly energy saving method of food production if done properly. You have to admit in considering all of the fresh produce that we import from Africa, Brazil, New Zealand etc. it is almost gluttonous, especially considering your point that our food production is the most productive/efficient. In other countries, many of which we import produce from, people are starving.

Blame it on the Socialists.

Hmmm, when I think of Socialism I always think of the ideologies of the Social Democrat parties in places such as Sweden. Of course, I also think of Canada, which is often termed a Socialist country, particularly by Americans. Interesting to think that currently and likely the foreseeable future, the Socialist regimes will no doubt dominate the economy (China). And for the record, North Korea and Cuba are de facto dictatorships under the guise of self-declared socialist states. Socialism is a bad word for most rational people? Perhaps, on another note... most rational people also accept the science behind climate change.

No worries, it won't below zero for long. Actually the climate in Central and Northern Italy (where most of their agriculture is situated) is very similar to many regions in Canada. In fact, when you look at the actual ratio of land in the same planting Zones; we, in fact, have a considerably larger amount...and a lot less people. The initiatives are difficult, but hardly close to being impossible.

It is amazing how 'Socialist' has become a bad word......

Indeed, green spaces are good, and grass is better than concrete, I agree. I really believe, however, that growing a few veggies on your lot is a great way to save energy on so many levels. Grass on the otherhand, is cut, watered, and often the clippings are thrown in landfills; it is a very odd and in many ways ridiculous.... kind of like a lot of things that were spawned from the British aristocracy. I was in Italy a few years ago and it was amazing what people in that country do; even there front yards are converted to food production; wish we had the climate for that.

It sounds like you had a seriously difficult job, but correct me if I'm wrong, did you just compare your job where you made "good money" to a lady in Kenya tying flies for minimum wage to feed her family? My guess is you had a choice and still do; I wonder what her options are? Perhaps if she could make 'good money', she would do so as opposed to tying flies for 10 hours a day at minimum wage just so she could feed her family. I'm sorry Canadensis, but your comment bleeds insensitivity and a hierarchal attitude towards people in poorer nations. I have trouble excepting the idea that it is ok for people to work under tough conditions with little options, so we can have cheap flies, and they can make just enough to feed their kids. Regards.

This is a good idea, and in fact, it is a part of an international standard of rights set out by the United Nations (contact CLUCK). Calgary is one of the few cities in the world where small scale urban chicken farming is illegal. My own relatives kept chickens in their backyards when I was young (different province). It is a very good practice for several reasons; it allows people to access fresh food (eggs), and also serves as an educational tool in the community. And for the record they're not 'eco-weenie hippies', they're Italians. I'm not sure why people would resist this idea, especially if it is kept on a small scale....perhaps rural Albertans feel threatened? I don't believe people everywhere would start raising chickens if it was legal as Clive implied; it is legal all over Canada and that hasn't occurred. I consider myself to be a serious urban gardener; however, I wouldn't raise chickens primarily because of heating issues and time. That said, using your urban space to raise grass has got to be one of the biggest wastes in our cities. I hope these people are successful in changing the law; everyone has a right to raise food in there own space (scary....that sounds so Conservative).

I'm not sure where this argument is going, but I don't believe sweat shops, child labor etc. is real debatable at this point. It's not right; it is exploitation of poorer nations for the financial gain of western corporations, and their customers. Why should somebody work for less than we do? What makes us better or more deserving? And for the record Smitty, I'm not 'whining'....I'm raising questions. It is something we all unfortunately have to live with, but how someone can compare their savings and exploitation of individuals in third world countries as 'job creation' is quite odd, and certainly misleading. If one believes the status quo of our current economic system is necessary, or rather, a balance in which poorer nations require western corporation to exploit labor... you're fooling yourself; cheap labor is not ad hoc to western corporate success. I'm not sure of the exact situation with offshore fly production, but I would speculate the workers are exploited to a certain degree. From personal experience though, there is no money in fly tying.

I have converted most of my city yard space to raised gardens; it is almost a full time job. So far I have harvested (this month); 5 x 5 gallon buckets of potatoes, 5 gallons of carrots, and 5 gallons of beets. My wife and kids have also been eating several different greens, and zucchini throughout the summer. I have several other raised gardens with later varieties of beets, potatoes, salsify, and squash that I haven't harvested yet. I have one tomato plant, a variety called Siletz that is quite an early determinate strain; but I won't grow it again because of the square footage and time it takes to care for it. I also have raspberries, strawberries, and I have planted several varieties of grapes this year. I experimented with amaranth this year to see if I could produce some quinoa like grain; it was unsuccessful. You need appox. 4000 square feet to grow enough food for one person for the year; this is very climate dependent however, and Calgary is hardly the best place to do it. Potatoes produce the most calories per square foot of any vegetable....they grow very well here. It is an interesting vegetable as well because it is one of the only ones you can survive on. I have a very large root cellar and many vegetables; particularly potatoes can last well into next growing season. I also can and freeze a lot of food (mostly can because I don't have a large freezer). As I said I try to grow a lot of my own food. Just wondering how you do that from October to June? See above. Do you eat out? Sometimes, but not often. Do you buy Alberta-grown veggies in December? Yes, you can buy Alberta grown veggies in many places well through the winter. Do you eat prepared foods? I try not to eat premade food if that is what you mean. Do you eat everything raw? No. How much more efficient (or inefficient) is it for you to produce a kilo of carrots compared to a 500-hectare carrot farm? I haven't the slightest idea, but I think producing food in an urban space is better than grass clippings. Little fact; Cuba produces between %80 and %90 of its produce consumed within the country from urban gardens. How much native grassland had to disappear so you can grow a few kilos of veggies each year for a few weeks? I produced a lot more than a few kilos, and no native grassland disappeared on my account; it was gone where I live long before I was born. That said I have tried to plant several native varieties of grasses in the unused areas of our place. This is my last post on this site so I would appreciate if the moderator could close my account; I have a personal matter to attend to that will be keeping me away from this, work and other things in my life for a long while (this is not a joke either). I hope you all know my posts were to bend towards the extreme to get people talking. The last word is yours. Regards and tight lines.

Indeed. The yapping and bravado in here.......

Indeed, but just for the record, and my own accountabilty. I share a vehicle with 4 people. I try to grow a lot of my own food. I use public transit, or bicycle to go to work. I was recycling long before the blue bins. I eat very little meat, and I keep fish when possible (legal). shall I continue

I think what consistently happens when you try to argue with someone form the Oil and Gas industry is they tend to take the argument out of focus; this method seems to be quite effective, albeit crude (pardon the pun) and childish. This discussion is a prime example. I posted a report on Acids Rain and Oil Sands and the first two responses were that the story / study is bias. The study was done by a branch of the Saskatchewan government (which, if one were to suggest bias, one would think the G of S would be bias towards industry?), and even after we got past the source, the bias argument continued. These tactics are really clever; deviate from the issue, accuse a legitimate source of being bias and false, and suggest the whole issue/argument is bunk. And then there is the technique where one deviates from the issue by pointing out other faults of our society to justify another; comparing apples and oranges. Urban Sprawl and Oil Sands are two different issues. This type of justification is childish; it is the 'if they can do it why can't I argument'. It is like our government a few years back about the Kyoto Accord and there "if China isn’t abiding by it, why should we" argument. This type of arguing epitomizes the emptiness and greediness of industry. This emptiness is exemplified quite distinctly in your last sentence Sundance; 'Now we should be part of the solution and help make progress work within the confines of how society deems that appropriate'. The key word there is progress ('progress' being another term used interchangeably in the oil industry with 'money') and that is all that people [who can't see the atrocities of the Oil Sands] really care about. Another word you used incorrectly in the sentence is 'Society'; that should be replaced with industry....then it doesn't sound like such BS. 'Now we should be part of the solution and help make progress/money work within the confines of how industry deems that appropriate' Now the above statement holds true to every argument the pro oil sands posters have wrote in this thread. Regards.

There is so much spinning going on here I'm getting dizzy.

Spinning again...... Read the second post by Jayhad, and the third by Rickr; both mentioned a one-sided article, aka bias. I can assure you, anyone reading this thread that has even the smallest amount of objectivity can see through you guys. Again, we 'were' talking about Acid Rain/ Oilsands.

Everyone who is reading this thread; please note: Rickr and the other oil cronies here have turned an article discussing factual evidence from a government source into a debate on bias; if that's not spinning the issue I don't know what is? Do they teach you guys this stuff down at EnCana? Now I am through; if you care to discuss Acid rain and the source no problem. If you are going to discuss how we can't trust the news, government bodies, and how every study is bias and untrue I would suggest you refrain from commenting on any other news article, scientific journal, or government study in the future; to do so would be hypocritical. Regards.

That is one of the most beautiful browns I ever seen.

An anagram of my first and last name.

And good luck to you.