Hey anti smoking bullies....I told you so!!

page: 3
34
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by winofiend

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by AnnKoontz
 


Exactly......and once Cali or NY do it, it spreads like wild fire!

It just infuriates me that people don't care what is happening to our freedoms!



The environment > your freedoms.
The environment will be here in whatever shape we leave it in, long after your freedoms are nothing more than mere etches on paper in an unused decrepit building in a new jungle around what once was a city.

It's been 42c here the last few days and we've had to suffer noxious smoke from fires, which makes even the hot humid air impossible to breathe. And in winter we have to put up with it when a thousand fire places are lit.

It just infuriates me that people don't care about the environment or the air everyone else has to breathe.
edit on 1-1-2013 by winofiend because: (no reason given)


i think it depends on what's being burned really. wood for example, is not a fossil fuel so the smoke is not harmful to breath out in the open air and also it doesn't add as much to the carbon footprint, if that's what you're concerned about. billions of tons of exhaust from fossil fuel burning in cars, trucks, ships and planes is the gorilla in the room and not firewood.




posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Obviously the naysayers have never lived upwind of a neighbor who burns his fireplace every single day in the fall and winter and even sometimes in the summer, sending particulates through every tiny opening in the house next door. My sister and bro-in-law have that problem, tried to take it to court, and were told it's legal. Legal to harm someone's lungs, furniture, and possessions, and make it impossible to crack open the window for some air. I applaud San Francisco for its wisdom.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlowinSmoke
How is burning wood...affecting the air we breath? The last time i checked, smoke rises. And, don't trees breath bad air and and produce good air? The logic of wood burning being unhealthy, just doesn't make sense. Kinda like saying second hand smoke causes lung cancer. Who's writing these scripts? I SERIOUSLY doubt...smoking cigarettes causes lung cancer. My mom was a chain smoker...practically all her life...and she never got lung cancer. She did, however, get breast cancer...but it had NOTHING to do with cigarettes! It was more of a result from a poor lifestyle and unforgiveness in her heart. Some things...she just couldn't let go of. Those things...eventually eat you til you die!


Smoke may rise, sometimes. It varies. Gaseous convection in air is dependant on the density of the gas in question. Basically, if the mass of a in volume x is less than the mass of b in volume x, a will rise in a medium of b, and vice versa.

The problem with smoke is that it is not solely a gas, it contains carbon dioxide and monoxide (in varying proportions depending on the quality of combustion) and various solid particulates such as soot and dust.

Carbon dioxide is actually denser than air under standard conditions, but due to the equation pv=nrt, when the temperature is increased (burning) the CO2 increases its volume (expands) which makes it less dense, so it rises initially.

When the smoke mixture is cooled by the air, the separate components begin to fall back towards the ground level. CO2 is the densest gas found in smoke, so it falls first. It falls to an extremely low altitude i.e. not even up to your waist and isn't really a significant health risk except in very concentrated doses.

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a deadly gas in any dose, it is less dense than CO2 and therefore more likely to be inhaled by a human. The problem with CO is nothing to do with cancer at all. CO is an oxygen (O2) replacement molecule. What this means is that the haemoglobin (Hb) in your red blood cells has a greater affinity for CO than O2. When a CO molecule attaches to a Hb molecule in your blood, it takes up space usually reserved for O2. The consequences of this are dire. The presence of CO in your blood reduces O2 partial pressure throughout your body and results in less O2 being distributed to your cells. When an O2 molecule attaches to Hb, it is released at various points throughout your body by brownian diffusion through capillary walls. The Hb is then deoxygenated and sent back to the lungs to pick up more O2. When a CO molecule attaches to Hb, it does not diffuse through any capillary walls and instead stays attached to the Hb until that red blood cell is destroyed and recycled by your body. This can take months.

This is why smokers experience "lack of breath" - they have to breathe more air to provide the same level of O2 to their cells as if they didn't smoke.

CO is produced when carbon is incompletely burned. The (basic) usual reaction for burning wood is:
C + O2 --> CO2
In amateur or poorly designed fire pits, the above reaction is accompanied by:
C + 1/2O2 --> CO

The CO producing reaction will always be present, it is not possible to completely combust anything in reality, but poor air flow and various weather factors can increase the ratio of CO production to CO2 production.

-------

As for your question about trees breathing bad air and producing good air - no. Trees and other photosynthesising plants do use CO2 in photosynthesis to produce sugar and oxygen, but that is a completely different process to breathing (respiration) which trees do actually do, in exactly the same way as humans!

The problem with that is again, CO2 isn't a terribly bad thing for human health, in high doses it can kill us, yes, but it's not really a practical health risk. As I explained earlier, the problem with smoke is the CO.

-------

Cancer is not caused by CO2 or CO as they are not mutagens. Carcinogenic particulates in smoke are the cause of extra/additional mutations during DNA replication which CAN increase your risk of POTENTIALLY destroying your body's multitude of cancer-answer systems. For information on DNA replication and the process of mutation, see my post on an unrelated topic in which I describe the process here:

reply to post by Dispo
 


Edit: the process of mutation may not even affect us at all, sometimes it may be like swapping the word rain for reign, other times it may be adding a d to the word andd, and other times it may be like taking a letter away from the word becuse. The word and sentence would still be perfectly readable.

Sometimes though, it can completely change the meaning of the sentence, like it it removes the n't from the sentence "do put your hand in the fire."

Then bad things happen, tumour suppressing genes don't do what they're supposed to, proto oncogenes become oncogenes and we all die.

N.B. These mutations happen over time, which is why cancer is more common in old people, and why cancer was relatively unheard of back when the average life expectancy was 40. Cancer is like life's catch-all killer - if the liver and the heart don't get you, cancer comes along and says "that's your lot." Carcinogens like some chemicals in smoke can accelerate the rate of mutation, which increases the likelihood of bad mutations happening. That said, I'd rather live to 60 and have fun than live to 90 on salads and jogging.

Finally: lol why would anyone ban wood fires? That's just silly.
edit on 2-1-2013 by Dispo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gridrebel
Well it's not a permanent ban, just temporary til the weather changes. I think this is a responsible act. Just like in the summer dry windy months, many places have burning bans. It's just common sense.


It's not common sense, as a matter of fact they don't even know if this will have any impact. They just like to do things that seem like they have an effect.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   
GOOD! It's about time fireplaces were banned. They're thousands of times more damaging than second hand smoke and the difference is that with cigarettes they're all but harmless for anyone outside of your house or your immediate vicinity.

Where as we know fireplaces release hugely damaging smoke that can impact people, significantly, for hundreds of metres around.

www.samharris.org...

we don't accept people smoking in a room full of children, why do we accept these ignorant folks killing everyone within proximity? I think people have a right not to be slowly poisoned by selfish neighbours



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold

Originally posted by timetothink
Well, I didn't have long to wait to say that.

I told you in many anti smoking threads that if you let the smokers be bullied and lose their rights, they would come after something you love soon.

No one learns!

Now it is fireplaces in California.......how long until its summer BBQs?

When will people stand up to fight for their rights and stop this nonsense?

I guess you all get what you deserve.

Please have at it and tell me how wrong I was.....


Right now i am going to light my fireplace and have a smoke while I still can.....




PLANNING ON CUDDLING UP BY THE FIREPLACE NEW YEAR’S DAY? NOT IF YOU’RE IN SAN FRANCISCO


www.theblaze.com...


Oh ok.. because you seem to want to smoke and endanger the life of everyone around you it should be ok and encouraged to get revenge if you lose your right to do so. Is that what your suggesting? How very childish of you. That is something I would expect from a first grader not a grown adult. Seriously need to get a clue. It sounds like your obsessed with this for some reason that defies logic.
edit on 2-1-2013 by GArnold because: (no reason given)


in a matter of health.. ur cars are endangering my right to clean air. turn them off now. let's lobby for legislation for more ridiculous laws... america is going down the gutter anyway.. might as well speed it up.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by collietta
 


If its such a problem, then shouldn't cars be limited also?

But that would be inconvenient, wouldn't it?



Umm, pretty sure there are emission standards for cars. In other words, cars that don't pass emission standards are banned. And yes, banning all cars would be a bit of an inconvenience.

Funny how people are getting all worked up over a 1 day fire ban, which seems fairly logical and reasonable to me. They're not trying to take away rights, just trying to protect people - you know, what they're paid to do.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:12 AM
link   
i would be willing to bet it is more industrial pollution than woodsmoke anyways....
The people hav to pay for their paychecks........so the companies can get the money back.....



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Absolutely ridiculous. How can they tell people what they can and cant do in their own homes? Whats next? Cameras in every home to monitor everything we do? This is out of control!



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by JarheadFidelis
reply to post by timetothink
 


Absolutely ridiculous. How can they tell people what they can and cant do in their own homes? Whats next? Cameras in every home to monitor everything we do? This is out of control!


electric and steam boiler heating just cut a deal with the nwo to take yo money.. fireplaces dont put money in the pockets of large corporations.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by 0mage
 

Aint that the truth. We will be told what to do as long as the politicians bow to the almighty dollar. Its sickening and disgusting to say the least.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by JarheadFidelis
reply to post by timetothink
 


Absolutely ridiculous. How can they tell people what they can and cant do in their own homes? Whats next? Cameras in every home to monitor everything we do? This is out of control!


That's a ridiculous argument. They already do tell you what you can and can't do in your own homes. Can you have a tiger as a pet inside your home - no. Can you have large bon-fires in your front yard - likely not. Can you have a shooting range in your front yard - probably no. Can you build, install plumbing, etc without a permit - no. And besides, these fires might be "done in your own home", but its effect is felt outside of your own home.

For all of you out there that think the government is always out to get you - you need to think what precipitates these regulations and laws. They're usually doing these things for what they perceive to be the general good of the public - they aren't always right on that account, but to think there's some big slippery slope here and they're conspiring ways for total invasion of your privacy is absurd.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by JarheadFidelis
reply to post by timetothink
 


Absolutely ridiculous. How can they tell people what they can and cant do in their own homes? Whats next? Cameras in every home to monitor everything we do? This is out of control!


because what you do in your home doesn't start and stop there. Maybe i want to burn my house to the ground, but I don't think the neighbours would want me to and it's not right that I be allowed to endanger their health

i'm sure you'd be happy living next door to a meth lab


it baffles me that many americans who talk freedom the most don't understand anything other than freedom for the individual. What about your neighbourhoods right to live without being poisoned by your arrogance?



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by JarheadFidelis
reply to post by timetothink
 


Absolutely ridiculous. How can they tell people what they can and cant do in their own homes? Whats next? Cameras in every home to monitor everything we do? This is out of control!


That's a ridiculous argument. They already do tell you what you can and can't do in your own homes. Can you have a tiger as a pet inside your home - no. Can you have large bon-fires in your front yard - likely not. Can you have a shooting range in your front yard - probably no. Can you build, install plumbing, etc without a permit - no. And besides, these fires might be "done in your own home", but its effect is felt outside of your own home.

For all of you out there that think the government is always out to get you - you need to think what precipitates these regulations and laws. They're usually doing these things for what they perceive to be the general good of the public - they aren't always right on that account, but to think there's some big slippery slope here and they're conspiring ways for total invasion of your privacy is absurd.


that's right, but there are people out there it seems who think that it's there right to subject everyone in a few mile radius to the carcinogens from their fires. the freedom of a person to recklessly burn fires for recreational purposes far outweighs the freedom of the hundreds or thousands living in the area around them to breathe clean air!



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by BlowinSmoke
 



How is burning wood...affecting the air we breath? The last time i checked, smoke rises. And, don't trees breath bad air and and produce good air? The logic of wood burning being unhealthy, just doesn't make sense. Kinda like saying second hand smoke causes lung cancer. Who's writing these scripts? I SERIOUSLY doubt...smoking cigarettes causes lung cancer. My mom was a chain smoker...practically all her life...and she never got lung cancer. She did, however, get breast cancer...but it had NOTHING to do with cigarettes! It was more of a result from a poor lifestyle and unforgiveness in her heart. Some things...she just couldn't let go of. Those things...eventually eat you til you die!


"bad air"?! "good air"?!

this is the most concentrated essence of stupid I might have ever read on this site. EVER.

the OP and his friends have caused my "will to live" serious damage.

it has become hard enough these days to navigate through the ACTUAL threats imposed by our out of control governments. do we really need to manufacture additional problems out of legitimate public concerns?



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by JarheadFidelis
 

not so much about what people do in their homes, more about what is excreted from their homes into the commons (air)
read this

I'll bet, the 'I was freezing' defense would get you out of trouble.
edit on 2-1-2013 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


Instead of calling someone stupid for not knowing something, you could try teaching them what you know and they don't.

How would you feel if a plumber called you stupid for your choice of boiler?



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 11:24 AM
link   

I hate California for nonsense like this. They really are a state of over 90% retarded people.....


Well, I guess I have a 90% chance of being retarded since I live in San Francisco. We bemoaned the fact that we couldn't have a fire in our fireplace yesterday for about ten seconds. Then, we had a lovely meal at one of the city's great Asian restaurants and went for a walk atop a high hill where we watched a breathtaking sunset over the Pacific ocean.

Hate Cali? You're just jealous.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Did you not read the article completely before you started ranting and raving?



I guess you rant about water restrictions in a drought as well.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by 0mage
 


I love when childish nut jobs call others childish.....it's like watching the Abbott and Costello.


We are so childish for wanting fire a natural process, created by NATURE, but they aren't childish for wanting their cars and everything else they use daily that creates pollution. Unnatural processes that are destroying the earth and lungs more than my fireplace or cigs ever could.

By the way...I purposely didn't mention that I don't have a wood stove or coal stove, just to see how the soapbox people would pounce if they thought I had a horse in the race. It's so funny.

I have a natural gas burning fireplace which is exempt from the restrictions, but I can still see the ridiculous direction this type of banishing heads in.

Today lets pick on people with fireplaces, tomorrow people who dye their hair....what's next?

Extremists are called that for a reason.

By the way, some people have no other way to heat their homes or can't afford gas or electric to do it. Some people keep warm by living off the trees on their land like thousands of years before us.

So will you allow the government to go to people homes and inspect for they modem of heating and if they claim they can't afford to pay for gas or electric (electric produces much pollution) allow the government to inspect their finances and force them to pay? Because that's where crap like this always leads.





new topics
top topics
 
34
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join