It has to do with the denial of what man is doing to the earth. Some men deny the facts that we are polluting it disgracefully. Some men own up to it. The only way to solve a problem is to admit it is a problem. The continued denial of our polluting the earth only leads to more polluting. It's very frustrating to watch people live in dreamland and deny the truth and the facts. Until the right wing liars stop lying about the harm man is doing, man will not be able to stop doing harm. Don't blame me for calling the right wing talk shows and their blind believers out on this. Blame the talkers and the listeners.

We're talking about trash out in the Ocean, not Global Warming. If you want to talk about Global Warming, there are plenty of threads for it.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

I have a similar post in the environment forum about trash at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. There is more information there.

I am saying don't toss out the bottom line issue, that we are using containers that do not biodegrade well. We need alternative materials for containers.

__________________
National Debt =

We're talking about the denial - on THIS thread - about the problem. You've denied it, joe's denied it.

If you keep denying there's a problem, how do you expect it to be resolved? Denying it doesn't make it go away.

The post you quoted above doesn't mention global warming by me. Only by you. Twice.

You have yet to prove that it is as big as a problem as you claim. Those on your side have lied about it's size to a disgraceful degree. There have been no presented facts and you just keep engaging in fallacies, ad hominem, red herring, and appeal to both fear and ridicule.

Before you can say we are dening a problem you have to prove that there is a problem. Blogs don't qualify as proof.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

Who is going to go out and measure the trash in the ocean? My position has always been that it is large enough that we be concerned about our non degradable trash. I am saying that with full knowledge that cities across America are considering banning plastic bags and bottles. Scientists are seeing plastics in landfills from 20-30-40 years ago that are 100 percent intact.

__________________
National Debt =

Who's lied about it? What's your proof that there have been lies about it? You haven't provided any links to prove your theory but there are several links already here about the HUGE amount of garbage floating in the pacific ocean.

You deniars are just making the problems worse. What exactly do you achieve by denying this anyway? Is it just a right wing trait to bury your head in the sand?

Howstuffworks "The Great Pacific Garbage Patch"

And here's where this site gets it's info. Just so you don't have to waste your time denying it.

That's a good source (unlike the blogs that were presented earlier) and that is something that can be used as evidence.

Let's go through this

http://www.unep.org/regionalseas/mar...ean_report.pdf

The density varies greatly in the npcg, but the higest densities are around 1 piece of plastic per 3 sq meters (that is not the average, that is the worst spots) and "mainly plastic fragments" these fragments are also known as "mermaid tears" which are very small, usually about 5mm wide. 1 5mm (or even 2 or 3) mermaid tear, in a 3 sq m spot, isn't even close to be an island. The average of the total area of the northeast pacific is 1 piece per km sq (according to your sources)

The 'twice the size of texas' things refers to the spot in the ocean that is surrounded by the current that traps them in there, not the actual volume of the garbage, even though there is garbage in the entire area (just at different densities).

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

No, you were not right on the spot with me.

Do you want to elaborate on this?