Skip to comments.
Emission Of Smog Ingredients From Trees Is Increasing Rapidly
SpaceDaily ^
| Sep 29, 2004
| Princeton NJ (SPX) Sep 29, 2004
Posted on 10/02/2004 10:00:37 PM PDT by jrushing
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 last
To: Tarpon
If a tree emits polution, it is not polution.
If a cow farts, it is polution, because people eat meat. Especially males.
If you don't eat meat, you can grow trees, and feel good. The polution, in this case, is good.
Smog is good, as long as it is from nature.
</sarcism
Did I get it right?
41
posted on
10/03/2004 1:57:54 PM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(Kerry is a traitor)
To: MonroeDNA
It's getting confusing isn't it. I am still trying to figure out if salt is good or bad for you this week.
42
posted on
10/03/2004 6:27:08 PM PDT
by
Tarpon
To: El Gato
Depends on what you mean by "this area".You're looking at averages; it's in real life, where you get years with plenty of rain throughout (like this year) and years where the ground is so dry that crevices open up down to the 'white rock'; it those latter years that 'kill trees' that I'm talking about.
There is also a N-S dividing line between Dallas and Ft Worth from which the 'average' rafinfall picks up dramamatically - this is owed to the 'path' Gulf moisture makes in it's trip northward ..
43
posted on
10/03/2004 7:05:29 PM PDT
by
_Jim
( <--- Ann C. and Rush L. speak on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
To: jrushing
OK WHAT? lets think logically shall we. first your wrong on two points. number one: TREES DO NOT CAUSE POLLUTION!! they may cause chemicals to be released BUT SO DO WE, the human body secretes chemicals in our sweat, but its produced naturally, therefore ITS NATURAL, NOT POLLUTION. now it is true that plants (in general) can hold pollution, but thats only if it hits them from stuff like smog, and because of that they release it slowly (even then its filtered through the veins of the tree, making it more resillient to said pollution in the future, and lessening the harmful gasses that are released. number two: REGAN WAS NOT CORRECT, Regan was either a corrupt moron, that either had friends in, or was paid off by, the logging industry; or, he was a gullible moron; or finally, he was just a friggin moron. oh, and by the way, this isnt coming from an "eco-nut" as you so aptly put it, this is coming from someone who doesnt give a rats a*s about nature, or the state of the rain forests, this is just coming from a semi-intelligent person who doesnt like to see people say stupid stuff
44
posted on
05/14/2006 11:24:48 AM PDT
by
an intelligent person
(the next republican that compares the democrats to the nazis, needs to look in the mirror)
To: an intelligent person
REGAN WAS NOT CORRECT, Regan was either a corrupt moron . . .Spelled Reagan, moron.
45
posted on
05/14/2006 11:27:08 AM PDT
by
dighton
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson