when global warming is the biggest threat to our planet?why is the u.s trying to distract attentionto?

Question

since the u.s are the biggest polluter and consumer of natural resources and they and their allies are responsible for over 80 per cent of global warming, is it time thier people are told that global warming is the biggest threat to planet earth, global warming can wipe out countries and the planet, terror can only kill few ppl, off china and india hve been only industrial powers for the last ten years so they can.t be blamed for pollution.

Answer 1

the u.s thinks the world is blind, they can brain wash thier own ppl but not the rest of the world, nature will decide judgement day

Answer 2

stop being a hater. jealousy isnt very becoming. You know that the US is made up of people from every other country now dont you. So maybe if everyone from all the countries would stay at home and stop comming to the US the US wouldnt be such a over populated place making so much pollution or requireing to use up so much resources. We cant help it if we like to live nice work hard and get to enjoy it. Do you own a car? Do you heat your home? Do you throw away your trash? Do you use plastic? Do you flush your toilet? Do you take a shower? Do you use only biodegradable soaps? Do you watch TV? You obviously are using a computer so you are using electricity and I doubt your electricity is coming from windmills and any transportation you use other than walking or riding a bike is using fuel and I am sure you dont use only fresh foods that haven been prepackaged so you are just as guilty as anyone else for global warming. I dont know about anyone else but to me the planet is getting colder since summers dont last as long and arent near as hot as they used to be. And I am in southern California. I dont feel it getting any warmer only colder. Each year I use the air conditioner less and less during the summer because it just doesnt get as hot.

Answer 3

There are two sides to this argument: 1) global warming is real, 2) what we think of as global warming now is actually just part of a larger cycle of environments on Earth.

1) Yes, it's unfortunate that global warming is continuing, and that the United States, as a prosperous nation is a significant contributor to the overall trend. However, underneath all the political bickering over this issue is the main theme that adjusting to global warming is not in our country's economic interests. Basically, we want to continue being a rich nation. Our politicians know that. They know that increased curbs on the automotive industry will hurt transportation of people and (more importantly) goods throughout the country. Curbs on gas emmissions (which largely stem from cheap, old factory systems) would require billions of dollars in upgrades businesses would have to make to production centers, ultimately passing this cost on to consumers, in turn discouraging them from buying more things (why buy something for 40 bucks if it was 20 bucks a year ago and the money is worth the same amount annually?). They also know that while global warming will become increasingly noticable, most people in this generation will likely not actually die from it (a few skin cancer cases here and there aside). Thus, through an unfortunate calculation they figure "hey, you know what, lets enjoy ourselves and let some future generation figure it out". Probably not the best idea, but the truth. China and India indeed deserve a break, but once they reach the United States' prosperity levels they'd probably campaign just as hard against curbs to gas emissions etc...

2) There is always the possibility that global warming as we know it is merely part of a larger trend of warming and cooling throughout the history of earth (of which there is at least some evidence for). Certain things, such as a generaly inability to confidently explain repetitive ice ages and periods of higher global temperatures prior to man's industrialization, lend some level of plausibility to this argument. If this is the case, then regardless of the United States' or any other nation's consumption of resources and pollution of the upper levels of the atmosphere (pollution in general is bad, but lets stick with the global warming thing) we're going to heat up (and eventually cool down). Man's time on earth has been blissfully short (from the point of view of the planet), and many of these long-term cycles still remain a mystery to us.

Answer 4

You used TWO periods and one was in the middle of a word. One concept = One Statement = One period per concept.

Furthermore, no country can be responsible for "80 per cent of global warming", global warming cannot be quantified beyond a probable trend in temperatures, and therefore, cannot be factored nor broken down into percentages.

I think you meant to say 80% of the pollution.

But alas, American people dont need to be TOLD anything.

Most have probably heard of the concept of global warming, whether they accept that it can be CAUSED, or beleive that it is happening at all is a different story.

And the reason the US doesnt abide by any binding agreements on the matter is because it would place burden and government regulation on the economy, which is something many ( 50% or more) of taxpayers (especially the everpowerful corporate taxpayers and political contributers) dont care for.

Answer 5

Oh this is a fun one, you must Be about 20 if that.
1 The earth releases more carbon dioxide that cause green house gases than man does and that means all of mankind.
2 We have, mean mankind, have only been keeping record of temperatures for Little over one hundred years. To the live of the earth and its cycles that is one second of our lives. Which means there is not enough data to draw any conclusion. The ozone has been proven a natural phenomenon not because of aerosol cans, but you probably don't remember that. go back 50 60 yrears and we were going to freeze to death....Ted Dansen in 1989 said I quote "I've this continues we will all be dead in ten yrs"
Do the math ....HI still here, check some new data the emmissions in the United states are and have been on a steady decline since the seventies. go to a new cause,,, I know the rain forest time for that to be brought back up...

Answer 6

You sir are an idiot. The biggest polluter is Malaysia. Not the U.S global warming will never be a factor. I guess you also still believe the Ozone layer is shrinking. China can't be blame for polution dude your a riot.
Go to your "drum circle" eat your veggie food" and keep on protesting.
Oh, and clean your feet, wash off that Pachoulli oil, throw away your "Tye Die" you filthy hippie.
Please provide a link to your valuable info about how the Earth is in such danger. Terror only kills a few people? what liberal moron is feeding you this crap. Look up the U.S.S Cloe, The Madrid Train bombing" "9/11" and the "London underground bombing" then cross reference that with civilian causaulties caused by terrorist car bombs and if you think that number equals a few well as I stated before your an idiot.
Were that many people killed by global warming. Nope didn't think so. You can also add in those innocents killed in the Okalahoma city bombings as well.

Answer 7

I would suggest you do a bit more research on this subject before continuing with the emotional reaction that is permeating the world today. There are other answers for the warming trend. Having been presented by some more level headed authorities.. Global warming has occurred in the past, as has global freezing. As one scientists explained, we are still coming out of the last glacial period. Adding to that factor is the 5 degree change in the earth's axis. Will allow warming in some areas and cooling in others.

In case you are not familiar with the last ice age, mastodons were frozen while still standing, with fresh vegetation in their mouth. This was just about 10,000 years ago. Giving evidence that this trend is cyclic and is still adjusting. In case you never got to see the finding of the latest mastodon, it was buried except for its tusks, yet was still in the standing position. This was presented on tv in a documentary. Not that many years ago..

Accept the reality of what is going on and don't be stampeded by those working with your emotions. They seem to have a tendency to distort the facts. Al Gore seemingly trying to vie for the top spot.

Answer 8

you almost have a valid point. The US has lead the world in pollution for quite a while. The US has cut its pollution by over half in the last 20 years. Good start but lots of work need to be done. The US also exports many of the goods whos production causes pollution making many countries better places to live. Countries like Russia who are second in world pollution and have tripled there pollution output in the same 20 years need to start following the example set by the US in reducing emisions. Plus besides selling arms to terrorist what does Russia export to make the world a better place? India is third and is on the rise also but they export many goods to the rest of the world. Its a give and take. One of the other answers above also stated that most of the Global Warming stuff is political nonsense that can't be proven anyway. Its the earths life cycle but polluting is still bad.

Answer 9

Look I will point out that I could hardly be confused with an environmentalist. That said I am a reasonably intelligent person who is compelled to be swayed by facts and would never close my mind to possibilities.

My principle issue with your question is assuming facts not in evidence. The Global Warming Theory by it's nature is not a fact it is a theory.
Definition of theory:
1.a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena:
2.a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. a set of facts, propositions, or principles analyzed in their relation to one another and used, especially in science, to explain phenomena
A theory is certainly more than just a conjecture when used in scientific terms. It implies a body of evidence that is supportive but not yet conclusive. That the globe has experienced an increase in avg. temp. in the yrs since the start of the industrial revolution there is no doubt that is a clear fact based on historical data. But given that the the warming and cooling cycles over grand scales in earths history are still little understood and the rather limited ( in time) data set that global warming theorist are using leads to legitimate concerns about drawing conclusions too rashly. In fact taking into account the entire history of earth we are on the cooler side of the mean temperature earth has experienced. The basic argument involved is not whether the climate is warming but to what extent the effect of man, natural fluctuations in climate or both are influencing the current warming trend.
The most extremist views in the scientific community contend that it is almost exclusively attributable to man
The moderate view is that certainly man has had a significant impact in exacerbating an existing natural warming cycle.
Lastly are the skeptics who while acknowledging that in theory man can have some effect the impact compared to natural causes such as solar output natural hydrocarbon output etc. is to small to permanently impact global climatologically cycles.
I for myself am only slightly skeptical and leaning towards the moderate camp. Certainly claiming as fact that this is the wolds biggest danger is premature in my mind the science just isn't there yet.
Is it prudent to take some steps to limit carbon emissions certainly. but to make wholesale and draconian changes that would drastically strain the worlds economies I think is jumping the gun.
My main objection to the more radical elements of the environmental movement is their inflexibility. For instance in the US the largest source of greenhouse gases is power generation which is about 80% coal based. Now mention a modern Nuclear Power plant which would have a significant effect in reducing emissions from energy generation and they wail and protest and refuse any intelligent dialog. There are modern designs that are utterly safe from meltdown and catastrophic failure. Certainly there is the waste issue But i ask is this not a more manageable problem than catastrophic climate change as u obviously believe
you will see these same people promoting Electric cars when this does nothing to to solve the problem it simply transfers the emissions from the care tailpipe to the power plant smoke stack

In sum I have an open mind and am willing to be convinced I only ask that you be equally open minded about the problem and possible solutions

Paulsfree2004 U are misguided when you make unsupportable claims this is a disservice to to the community and diminish your credibility. This is exactly why I posted the definition of THEORY.. Stop being self serving and rhetorical and many more people would listen to your arguments.Your constant use of attacks not based on fact but on opinion rather than using your mind for intelligent debate only serve to undermine your message that the the right is close minded.

Answer 10

There is no such thing as 'Global Warming'. That was invented years ago by a bunch of neo-nazi, tree-hugging feminazi, grass-smoking, long-haired, peace-sign-showing, tye-dyed, vegitarian, enviromentalist, animal-rights-activist, be-one-with-the-Earth wanabees who think that because we are 5% of the worlds population, that we ought to apologize to the rest of the world for our standard of living, and our way of life. I'm very fortunate for being born and live in the greatest country the Earth has ever seen.. And I'm not about to or let someone try to lay a guilt trip on me or force me to apologize for my standard of living. if some out there don't like what we have here, then by all means, LEAVE!

But DON'T take my standard of living and my SUV, my house, with air conditioning, my refrigerator full of food, that I worked hard to put in there, and my medicine, and my satellite tv, and my fresh and safest water on the planet, and my two dogs, one cat (that are yes, OWNED by me, not equal rights co-habitors, (you don't give rights to something that can't appreciate or acknowledge them)), leave them here so you don't try to 'spread the wealth'. Afterall, you want to get away from all this materialism, so you'd be a hyppocrite if you try to 'spread it around'.

Thank You very much...

Answer 11

international warming is one in all our greatest treats. There has continuously been hurricanes, tornadoes and different organic mess ups yet with international warming those organic mess ups get extra suitable, extra helpful and much extra conventional. this could lead on directly to the extinction of the organic international in the international and featuring people. even although there are different threats like terrorism and fascism they are actually not as undesirable as international warming. we prefer a planet to outlive you already know!