Why is this issue dividing people? Yes, there is a consensus that the world is getting warmer. Yes, a majority of scientists attribute this to human-made causes, while a vocal minority of scientists disagree. There is a healthy debate among them, and at this point, it is unclear which camp is correct.
But let us look at this logically - which false-positive has the greatest potential of damage?
Even if those against man-made global warming ARE correct, by doing something now we can (a) stimulate the economy with developing alternative fuels sources and (b) reduce health problems associated with pollution.
But if those who don't believe in man-made global warming are INCORRECT....the downside is MUCH MUCH greater.
So what is the big deal? The answer seems pretty obvious....it shouldnt be a partisan issue.
2006-06-30 07:37:50 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Your notions are very well-reasoned. You are correct, the down side of accepting that we are responsible for global warming is much smaller than the downside of denial.
The ONLY reason that the conservatives deny global warming is that they are afraid it will hurt big business and big industry. They are less interested in the truth than they are about protecting their personal financial status.
2006-06-30 07:43:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
True, I like to think of it like "Pascal's wager" scenario, where the best outcome should be sought even if means lead to an okay end, choosing the best will guarantee a good outcome.
The argument about can be simplified to two reasons why both sides can't/won't solve it:
1) The solution to global warming is costly, and the effects would change everyone daily routines
(The same could be said if nothing is done)
2) The solution and time frame is still vaguely defined, the programs already initiated has shown only small contributions.
(The same could be said for all the practices that cause global warming)
So you see, it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, and the people in power are so obsessed with preserving themselves and their wealth & power that they don't really care/understand what will happen to future generations. Kind of makes you sick that multiple corporations rather make a steady profit over saving our descendent's lives...
2006-06-30 07:48:53 · answer #2 · answered by Factotum 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It isn't a partisan issue. Americans are socialized into believing in partisan politics and issues to keep them off balance and unsure....and divided. The government needs this to thrive. There are too many aside and inside deals that take priority over the good of the public and the people of the world. It's sad, but true, and it is likely that these are the people who will destroy the world. The actual facts are incidental.
2006-06-30 22:23:20 · answer #3 · answered by mithril 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well lets start with the fact that you..make perfect logical sense, and yes the answer has been painfully obvious for decades.
fossil fuel could have been done away with by now, if research was allowed in the 60's and 70's, when they undermined it...
the effects of pollution could have been radically different, if tougher laws were in effect for large corp., but when you make 10 billion, a 10,000 dollar fine, isn't much...
there is money involved...no logic..just money.
sad but true, this is what makes it an issue, hands in the money jar.
the secret is....we need to raise awareness, and..
eventually the tea, will be in the harbor again!
2006-06-30 20:03:52 · answer #4 · answered by sparkalittlefire 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agreed. The only reason to maintain the status quo is for those who are in power. By maintaining the status quo, they can afford whatever it takes for them to survive.
Why would they risk losing power? I think it is up to each one of us to make the choices that we feel are necessary as individuals. Many Americans are doing this already, by commuting by bicycles, choosing to live with less stuff, but more quality. Planting gardens, buying locally, to avoid the fuel spent in transporting these things.
When the Big Guys see that it is profitable to change, I think they will do so. But if we are only important to them as consumers, then that is where we must exercise our power.
Our economic measures have always emphasized growth and expansion, not sustainability. The answers need to come from elsewhere.
2006-06-30 08:10:05 · answer #5 · answered by Triple M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what the big deal is. I'm not convinced that this is anything more than just the planet going through it's cycles. And Al Gore is running around like chicken little.
2006-06-30 07:43:37 · answer #6 · answered by kathy059 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the earth is going to overheat, then it's going to overheat. Nothing the human race can do will change that.
2006-06-30 07:41:19 · answer #7 · answered by Karen_momof4 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋