Make That Thirty Minutes...
of fame for your very own Fredster.
I got a mention in the Times- Standard yesterday and the Eureka Reporter today. So, fifteen minutes of fame, times two, equals thirty minutes of fame.
I don't see a link to it on their web site, but the Eureka Reporter has a feature- I think it's weekly- where they take a part of a picture of a local landmark, not enough to easily recognize, and you guess what the landmark is.
My name was first listed among quite a few others for guessing the last one was a picture of part of the totem pole in Mckinleyville.
Ok...that was a pretty easy one. The only other one I guessed so far was one of part of the Fresh Freeze Drive In sign in Eureka. That was actually a bit more difficult than this last one despite living fairly close by Fresh Freeze.
I have no idea what the latest picture is. Grab a hard copy of the Reporter and see if you can figure it out.
****************
Our very own Steve Lewis gets another fifteen minutes of fame, as well, with the Eureka Reporter running his commentary on how old growth forests don't respirate as much as new forests, thus newer forests absorb more carbone dioxide.
That should be of concern for those of you worried about Global Warming. Oh, that's right; It's Climate Change now. That way we can also add colder than normal temperatures to the list of ills cause by the combustion engine.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:26 AM
37 comments
37 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Freddy's dead? I think not!
No, but the Buhne doggle is on life support in the credibility department.
Totum pole in Mckileyville
Let's remember this is the guy that thinks 11 year olds like being molested. I wouldn't say you're becoming famous Freddy, more like notorious.
Wonder how much kiddie porn fred has on his computer?
Steve, i'm sorry, but that story implying we should cut old growth to make better carbon storage is way 2 dimensional. It overlooks too many things to mention. It could be ANOTHER temporary crutch for the industry however.
Well, I guess that makes you king again!
And Steve's analysis is 2 dimensional. The sustainable forestry crowd are considering century and a half cycles in their proposals. It's the growth, not the youth per se, that consumes the carbon dioxide.
Fred, Congrats, I hope you're awarded a ride in the Arkley private jet and a chance to schmooze with Ginny Bass, Nancy Fleming and the Bohnhead. Enjoy the open bar: all the pepto-bismol and milk of magnesia you want.
Others have already said the Lewis op-ed reasoning is myopic, so I'll not beat that. Bottom line: forest growth can't significantly mitigate the effects of the amounts of fossil fuels being burned. To his credit, Lewis does acknowledge that global warming is occuring. But I'm concerned that his only reason for accepting global warming as fact is the oportunity to advance his extractionist agenda.
How about another parable (aphorism?)?: You can't wake up a man who is pretending to be sleeping.
You guys don't know your forest ecology facts. When you can point to old-growth trees as doing more carbon sequestering than two or three rotations of the same species, same area, same time frame-150-200 years, I will listen to you. But until you can do this, why should anyone pay any attention to your claims of my myopia?
It would seem clear that it is those still promoting old-growth sequestering strategy who are being myopic. All you got to do is prove me wrong with real forest science facts. Show us how a forest of 150 to 200 year old redwoods has stored more carbon than the same acreage of younger redwoods cut three times, replanted three times, and the wood used in building homes, furniture, paper, etc.. I don't think you understand that a 60 year old redwood tree is not a small tree at all.
"I hope you're awarded a ride in the Arkley private jet and a chance to schmooze with Ginny Bass, Nancy Fleming and the Bohnhead.".
Already done a little of that, but not on the Arkley jet.
"Bottom line: forest growth can't significantly mitigate the effects of the amounts of fossil fuels being burned. To his credit".
Then I guess we've had it since nature often has and still does put a lot more so- called greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than man does- volcanoes being one source.
I was just reading something this morning(?) from the National Center for Policy Analysis from a guy saying how something like 75% of the methane(?) released into the atmosphere comes from wetlands and the rotting material associated with it.
We should all start putting out affairs in order. I take that back; there shouldn't be anyone around to put our affairs in order for after we all asphyxiate from the CO2.
Goodbye cruel World time Fred? Or just Chicken Littles?
It sounds as though we need to cut the rest of our old trees down to save ourselves. After all, everyone knows it's a proven method for success: the carbon those forests will bank is infinite, as long as we keep cutting them, quicker and quicker. Put steven in charge of our forests, he'll save the planet with them and make jobs.
We hear a lot about how the internal combustion engine is putting the Planet in jeopardy.
So why don't all you geniuses just use external combustion engines?
I guess I again have to wait for people to catch up in their understanding of forest ecology. I posted the facts about the difference in carbon sequestering and now it's your turn to do some learning.
Here's a Wikipedia start:
"Old growth forests also store large amounts of carbon, both above and below ground. These forests collectively represent a significant pool of climate gases. Continued liquidation of these forests may increase the risk of global climate change. However, because growth is roughly equal to decay within old growth forests, they do not sequester significant amounts of atmospheric carbon—this is in contrast with young forests."
Hey, I'm just saying...
If anon is right and the vegetation of the world can't handle the carbon dioxide (and other emissions) from internal combustion engines, trees and such certainly can't handle the emissions of natural things like volcanoes, forest fires and such.
Next time we have a natural disaster, assuming it emits CO2, we might well be history, but there'll be no one around to read about it after we're gone.
Oh, that was supposed to be in response to anon.r, who wrote, "Goodbye cruel World time Fred? Or just Chicken Littles?".
I don't get it. Most of you are very intellegent people but you are so easily pulled to and fro by the sky is falling fear. Not to many years ago one would fall off the flat earth if they dared to go to far. When you are willing to admit that population is problem #1 and the harvesting and consumption of coal is #2 then and only then will we start to find a solution to the harm our over indulgence compulsions cause. Added together all the other fears falling from the sky are ridiculous in comparison. That of course does not mean that society should stop the search for the better mouse trap. Dennis
YOU FORGOT THE SUPER VOLCANO UNDER YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK.
dennis you do well to make me both agree and disagree with you- like many locals your opinions are varied depending on the topic, kind of like steve ; but dang he can come off as a little pro-timber wacky.
Fred, you'll always be famous to the twenty-seven of us who frquent the blogs.
Locals, Dennis. There's a guy who doesn't realize how well traveled you are. The poor dumb locals.
11:10 you're making a lot of assumptions, and you know what happens when you do that...
Fred, was that you I saw with the Arkley twins at the secret bohemian grove meetup?
It reminded me of watching two cats playing with a bunny rabbit.
Thank you,I think. I'm feeling so provincial,I think I'll poor somemore sawdust in my outhouse. Dennis
Careful Freddy...those college girls will eat you alive.
Anon.R.mous
Why don't you leave me the hell alone? I really don't understand your obsession with me. The first time you appeared was back in 2004 and you're still harassing me. Why? What purpose does it serve? You've obviously spent a lot of time and resources gathering information on me. Why? What purpose does it serve?
I'm not even a human being to you, you are a faceless shadow to me. Why this ridiculous game? What purpose does it serve?
What does it matter to you where I live or what I do with my life? Why? Why is it your concern?
What do you want from me? Why should I give it to you? Why do you think you deserve to get it from me?
Why do you want to hurt me so much? Why do you feel you've the right to hurt me?
Nick,with a little work that could be a great song.
I have to agree with Nick here. Hey, I like to make fun of Nick, but It got old, and I'm tired of it. When he does something stupid again, ill probably make some sort of rude ass post.
AnonRmous, what is your fuckin deal with Nick? I checked out you 'blog' and frankly you look like a big ol stalker. I mean, Bravo is funny - funny looking - but he really isn't the comedic gold you play him out to be. Its called obsession.
Fred, welcome to thy fame....
And, maybe there is more than 17 people who read what you have to say...
Go forth thy Man----bring us some thought for life can be boring at times...
Fred is a creep.
Exactly what kind of sawdust is that you're throwing in the outhouse dennis- and, is that a metaphor?
Bye-Bye carbon!
"Not to many years ago one would fall off the flat earth if they dared to go to far."
Jesus, Dennis, how old are you?
Carson, Many smarter than I suggest that time is not a concept nature is aware of, it's only a bain to the minds eye. I'm just a freckle away from 60 but I'm very high milage,its the milage that's my real bitch. How about this one ? "Not that long ago marijuana was legal and alcohol was not." Not that it's much different. Experience as well as ignorance can shape public and personal perceptions. I'm not trying to fight with anyone just engage in some fun dialog. Dennis
Post a Comment
<< Home