Climate change

Yes, my friend, I understood what you said and I read the excellent article that you offered up. And I offered that in the very same article that you cite, it states that science has evolved to the point where we understand the mechanisms of climate change, as we did not in the 1970s when the research was newer, and that scientists now agree (at least some 90%+ of them) that the path we are on is not sustainable for human life on the planet.

Westy,

As President Obama declared, people cling to their guns and bibles. Speaking metaphorically, you have yours and I have mine.

As for science, I side with those who believe science is never settled, because there is always more to learn and understand.

In what way is looking at the time frame of human existence "cherry-picking"? For all of human existence, CO2 levels in the atmosphere have remained fairly stable until the late 1800's when it shot straight up to levels that, if we continue pumping it out until the buffers are completely full, we will create conditions that are not sustainable for human life on this planet.

cherry-pick: to choose the best things from a group and leave those that are not so good. We can argue all day about whether man is able to effect global warming.

For the sake of argument, let’s accept that we’re a carbon emission pumping machine that can effect global warming. What will you do about it, other than exhorting people to save the planet? (Like most letters, we hear only the bellyaching, but no proposed solutions.) Because developed nations have had their cake and are still eating it, how will you convince China, India, and other developing countries to curb their use of fossil fuels and not have, and eat, their slice of cake? European nations are resorting to re-opening shuttered coal plants because their green power supplies aren’t nearly enough. Here in CA, where will this magic electricity come from to power our state, if not from fossil-fuel powered generation plants? Newsom authorized new gas generation plants, along with extending the life of a nuclear plant. BTW, what volume of carbon emissions was sent to “the cloud” via wildfires from the past few years? I wouldn’t be surprised if CA wildfire emissions were much higher than what all the folks in CA contributed. Looking forward to your proposed solutions…

Westy, let’s assume your N95 assertion is true and COVID particles in droplets are blocked by a mask. What happens when your exhalation droplets evaporate? Will COVID particles remain “stuck” to your mask? Hasn’t the “glue” from your breath disappeared? Assuming COVID particles hang around in your mask, will they eventually die, or will they “reincarnate” due to your future exhalations? After you take off your mask, what happens to the COVID particles previously “stuck” to your mask? Will they begin floating around after being freed from your exhalation “glue”? How long do COVID particles hang around in the air?

Remember also that N95 masks don’t create perfect seals around faces, especially bearded faces. Then there are folks who wear masks under their nose. N95 masks were not, and still are not the most widely used masks. And here’s the kicker, don’t you remember that your idols, Newsom, Biden, Harris, Pelosi, and many other Dems were caught not wearing masks? What do they know that you don’t? But if you believe masks work and you want to wear a mask, go for it. BTW, I never said vaccinated people can still catch COVID, because I’ve never recognized the COVID shot as a vaccine, just a jab. There you go again, trying to put words in my mouth.

While I've got your attention, you never did tell me what your plan was for addressing California's water crisis. Instead of ducking the question, you should have said more rain.

TY, Yes, I assure you that it is true that respiratory droplets are larger than the pore size in N95 masks and are blocked by face masks. Any mask helps, it doesn't have to be N95, that's just the best. Yes, the respiratory droplets will be on the mask and this is why doctors change their masks between patients (except during that terrible period of the pandemic when there weren't enough masks). Viruses are not living organisms, therefore the term “survive” may not be the most appropriate term. However, to prevent denaturation, viruses need to be in suitable conditions, such as the right pH, temperature, and moisture content tolerable to the virus. So as the mask dries out, the viruses generally denature. Still not a good idea to lick a mask someone has been wearing, but to answer your question, no, viruses do not float around in the air unless they are attached to a respiratory droplet. Covid spreads mostly from person to person, not through indirect contacts.

I'm not sure why you might think that occassions where certain people who affirm the benefits of masks were not wearing them is a refutation that masks are beneficial to stopping the spread of diseases. People make mistakes. And we all made many during the pandemic.

Did you know that "jab" in Britain is used as a synonym for vaccination? I can't help if you redefine words to fit your world view, I will continue to use the correct terms.

Yes it is very true that masks do not create a perfect seal. However, fewer respiratory droplets escape and those that do are not projected outward in the same way.

I'm not sure why you point out the folks that wear the mask under thier nose, yes, it is essentially the same as not wearing a mask.

Love how you redirected a thread from climate change to Covid, and now you want to go to water management! :-) If you would like to write a cogent letter to the editor about water management, perhaps we could discuss it there. I personally feel that's enough meandering away from climate change. Have a nice day!

Westy: I am really impressed by your patience with those plagued by knowledge-resistance, and your ability to explain what for so many is difficult to grasp. I, for one, learn a lot from you, and I even pass some of your explanations off to friends who like to be better educated!

Westy, I didn’t redirect the conversation from climate change to COVID. I was making a point regarding fact-checking scientific information “opinion” letters. You decided to run with the COVID discussion so here we are…

Since we can argue all day about the efficacy of masks without changing minds... Here's a thought... Perhaps you should provide your explanation to some of your idols, Newsom, Biden, Obama, Harris, Pelosi, and many other Dems who were caught eschewing masks. Based on their actions, their point of view appears to be the same as my point of view. Do we know or understand something you don’t?

BTW, there was already a letter regarding water management and in a comment, you implied starving horses in Saudi Arabia and anyone consuming alfalfa would save the state from our water shortage problem. I asked how much water your plan would save. No response so I’m following up. There’s no need to dance around the subject so if you don’t know, just say so and we can move on, knowing your assertion couldn't be supported.

Your input is much appreciated Terance - your thoroughly pragmatic approach is the antidote.