It's all about control through fear! Over time, and through constant repetition, it eventually sways public opinion, (the ignorant ones anyway!). And the scientific reports these people, (like Al Gore), refer to are few and hand-selected to make their case to an uneducated, gullible public!
2006-07-01 20:21:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by love_2b_curious 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
What I don't really understand that even if you want to politicize this, and even if you don't approve of Al Gore, why wouldn't one take strides to be environmentally responsible? Is it hard to recycle? to use recycled products? to use energy effiecient lightbulbs? to water and drive a little less? People that say things like "Well even if it is true, it's still a couple hundred years away, we won't be here then" Well, I'm hoping my gene pool will last that long and my great-great-grandkids will still exist. So discount, Al Gore, discount the bulk of scientists that have proven that this is happening, discount the Universities that have done the studies (UCSD, HARVARD, UCSB, Northwestern) and that pesky NASA (those naysayers, why would you believe NASA? They just put people in space) which totally supports the theory. So discount all of that..just on the off chance that they're right: why not do what you can do, to be ecologically responsible? Take the debate off table! Or better yet, say Bush said it and he was asking you to implement little things that would make a great difference for generations to come would you do it? Think carefully...
2006-07-02 05:59:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sidoney 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
GLOBAL WARMING/THE ENVIRONMENT IN GENERAL
Any and I mean any environmental cause or approach must be grassroots in nature. Having PhD's talk about global warming and having those representing industry interests debunk these present theories is a high level and almost an entirely futile effort. Don't get me wrong, it is great that someone with Al Gore's connections and exposure is getting the word out. However, people are people they want to see results.
Yes, the expression is now trite but still true, "Thing Globally, Act Locally". Watching the sky over a city, town or even a more rural area become darkened by smog has local impact, people take note and actually see A PROBLEM. A problem that can measured in terms of air quality or perhaps an AIR QUALITY HEALTH INDEX like the one that the provincial government in Ontario, Canada is in the process of implementing. You can measure results (however small) in terms of air quality and the affect it has on the health care system (those with breathing problems, doctor's visits, etc). It certainly speaks to the advantage of a UNIVERSAL health care system (however, actually implemented) as it actually makes sense to improve the environment as it keeps people healthy (a humanitarian cause) and when health care it publicly funded it affects the public coffers when people become ill therefore it even makes better financial sense to keep the environment a top priority.
Plus any approach must be entire with a complete overall plan (the big picture). Including recycling initiatives, energy solutions (alternatives/renewables can now present a real potential financial threat to the big oil companies and even power companies...), government involvement at all levels, public transit, greener vehicles in general (Hybrid, Hydrogen, Conventional electric, bio-diesel, ethanol), conservation in all energy arenas, ETC!
Economic viability is the real sell as many of these solutions are just that economically sensible (ensuring we look at the entire picture). Yes as more people use solar, wind and other renewable energy sources the cheaper the technology will get. Two of the newest billionaires have earned a large portion through renewables Solar (India I believe) and Wind (China I believe). Yes in many ways developing nations and economies will be the first and early adopters of such renewable tech as they are just building much of their infrastructure.
So what do we all need to do? GET INVOLVED ! Contact your local government about improving your recycling program, contact provincial/state/federal government about the adopting of these new technologies (renewables such as solar/wind), buy gas with ethanol in it and demand it, use and demand bio diesel, buy products with less packaging and demand manufacturers to reduce packaging and to offer a price break as a result. More ECONOMIC VIABILITY! After all energy diversity just like economic diversity is the safest and best bet for good long term results and return on investment.
Joe...
KEEP IT UP MR. GORE THE POLAR BEARS NEED YOU FIRST **GRIN**.
2006-07-02 21:30:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In 1993 Al Gore said global warming would destroy the earth in 10 years, so the world ended in 2003.
2006-07-02 03:20:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are wrong! There is nothing in it for Al Gore. If it scares you that we are losing our atmosphere....GOOD! It won't hurt you to think about this; when your kids are your age New York, Florida, California, and half of Europe will be under water! A different world is just around the corner. I congratulate Al Gole for having the guts to speak up and try to wake up the ignorant on this most important topic.
2006-07-02 09:21:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There has not been enough climate history to prove it.
In the 50's we were headed for an ice age. Things don't turn around that fast.
Scaring someone is not nice. And they must not have enough to do. But then that comes from the guy that invented the internet.
Go figure.
2006-07-02 03:19:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nothing such is there, which has shaken me. If dangers of global warming are there, they can take effects only after thaousands of years and by that time the bodies of the human beings would also have adjusted to that atmosphere.
2006-07-02 03:19:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
What Al doesn't realize is that the Internet is not like television where you can holler whatever you like and as long as you sound sincere people will buy it -- though point of fact: they didn't buy it there either or he'd be president. Here online there are people that will instantly fact-check him and he ends up looking like a confused older guy that hasn't really done his research.
Daniel
iPowerGRFX: Tampa Website Designers
http://www.ipowergrfx.com
http://www.publicadjuster.com
http://www.stenoproof.com
http://www.americanisraelicourtreporters.com
http://www.wlalwcc.org
http://www.insurancelossconsultants.eu
2006-07-02 04:47:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
global warming is real. even though we may not be effect drastically, our children (or grandchildren) certainly will. CO2 levels are higher than they have been in the last 650,000 years and the rate of increase is increasing. if we don't care about our children, then global warming isn't a big deal.
2006-07-02 03:22:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by huuep 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I just thought it was funny that most of us give goofy answers and then all of a sudden people started typing PARAGRAPHS of crappy information and sending links to Al Gore. Like he was really going to read through all that sh#t!! yeah right!!!
2006-07-02 05:49:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by liljomo1234 5
·
0⤊
0⤋