http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060913/ap_on_sc/warming_sea_ice
2006-09-13 13:30:32 · 17 answers · asked by The_Dark_Knight 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Stinky thinks I shouldn't believe NASA scientists. Well if Stinky thinks so, I must believe stinky.
2006-09-13 13:35:06 · update #1
Listen repugs that are trying to answer the question and pretending that there is no threat. Stephen Hawking thinks there is a threat, numerous physicists think there is, NASA thinks there is. And who really do you think you are to try and persuade others that there is no global warming? Go get a PhD in Physics from Oxford or Cambridge then I'll listen to you. Till then shut up and listen to the scientists.
2006-09-13 13:38:25 · update #2
Really, do you uneducated repugs really believe that you know better than a NASA scientist? Or world acclaimed physicists? You have no f*cking respect for knowledge and science!! This is unbelieveable, but you believe that the world was created in 6 days!!!
2006-09-13 13:41:53 · update #3
Oh, the excuses are not lame...just redundant. It is natural, the warming is, so cut, burn, fuel up, pollute, and generally have a great time.
I hope these young bucks will be around in 20 years to choke on their excuses and stupidity.
But, then again, what have I done to help save the Earth? Not much. I try to drive less, that's about it. Oh, and recycle. That is also pretty lame.
Humans are destined to destroy the biomes, then go extinct, and a better life form will hopefully do a better job after nature cleans up after our mess.
2006-09-13 13:37:33 · answer #1 · answered by powhound 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i do not trust they deny international warming is occurring. What i imagine they challenge is the concept each and every considered one of it really is the outcome of guy-made products. there's no denying that folk on the planet effect the elements. yet traditionally the Earth has cooled and heated up. maximum of those warm and chilly sessions got here about before the onset of the commercial Revolution and the pollution led to from it. So the question must be requested: why did international warming and cooling ensue then even as guy performed little or no position in it?
2016-11-26 22:07:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We have been able to monitor the global temperature since 1812. The earth has been around for a lot longer than that. How do we know this trend isn't just a natural cycle the earth goes through? Do humans affect the environment in adverse ways? Yes. Should we start a panic over something that cannot be proved and has only been studied for 200 years or so? Probably not. This could be just a natural cycle, or is could be the start of something horrible. We just don't know.
2006-09-13 13:35:59 · answer #3 · answered by ? 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
When they are able to prove that "global warming" that has occured in the past was due to the "greenhouse effect" and was man-made, then I'll believe it.
But whether the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking or growing, it's still global warming, right?
It's going to cool right back down again, and then people are going to be in a panic over "global cooling", and "OMG we're entering a new ice age!"
I'm not worried either way. Should we take care of the Earth? Of COURSE. Should we panic? Probably not.
2006-09-13 13:39:30 · answer #4 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
1. Fact, global warming is a periodic thing cause by the sun. You do know the sun.
2. We are merely getting back to a climate like it was when the vikings settled in Greenland, after a few hundered years I am sure it will shift back.
3. Human contributions are not close to being the end all of this. Stop all emissions tonight and in 50 years guess what, the freaking pole ice will still have shrunk.
2006-09-13 13:36:27 · answer #5 · answered by utahraptor88 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
This is one of those concerns that deserves attention and not more debate. The benefits of cleaning up far outweigh the detriments.
Any one who thinks that we can spew hundreds of tons of sulfur, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydro-carbons, NOX, etc...into the atmosphere and NOT have any unintended consequences simply isn't the brightest light in the harbor.
The big concern is simple:
In lane one, you have large profits and huge salaries with minimal environmental costs - today.
In lane two, you have the health and welfare of your grandchildren - years down the road.
Guess which horse wins this race - every time.
2006-09-13 14:12:34 · answer #6 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am a republican and I believe in global warming. It is not just the Democrats who care about the environment. So I have no clue why you are ranting on.
2006-09-13 13:40:38 · answer #7 · answered by Luekas 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Again the lameness lies outside the actual politicians. People are not going to cut down on their 900 channels cable tv systems so that they can pay up to 50% more for everything. And protecting the environment means paying more for just about everything.
2006-09-13 13:34:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
You can expect more from sane people. The earth has gone from Ice age to Tropics hundreds of times without regard to animal life what so ever. Humans couldn't change the temperature of the earth if they tried to.
2006-09-13 13:45:24 · answer #9 · answered by kdub ken 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Global warming is real. It's just the Earth NATURALLY heating up. Believe it or not...the Earth has not always been the same temperature. It goes up and down all the time(time as in thousands of years).
2006-09-13 13:33:38 · answer #10 · answered by null_the_living_darkness 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋