We (in the USA) buy the global warming theory, but don't buy the Kyoto accord. It's unfair to the US in so many ways. Most of it has nothing to do with CO2 gases, but welfare programs for poor countries. It also ignores the possibility of a technological solution to the problem. To allow nations like China and India to accelerate their burning of fuels, while severely requiring us to cut back, is totally unfair. If the world wants us to support this important intiative, then they need to think about creating a document that treats us fairly.
2006-12-05 07:45:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi
As an American I do believe in Global warming but not from CO2. Have you had one thought towards the cycles of the planet and how the planet makes the cycles? I think the volcanic activity on the planet should give a big clue as to what is actually happening. Aren't islands formed by undersea volcanoes? Why are we only looking at what humans do? also, what about pumping all of the oil out of the ground, what is replacing it? Water? Won't that heat and evaporate? There are a ton more questions that are not being asked. Let me add lastly, have you thought about what the solar flare cycles tell us about our planets reaction to them? That is much more powerful. But I also don't mind people taking care of the earth better. I for one am preparing for when we run out of oil and need alternative fuels or energy around. Stop focusing on ONE thing and open your eyes and look around. There is a lot more going on than just the CO2.
Blessings, from Florida, Joann
2006-12-05 16:06:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by joro889 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Have you ever heard of the ice age? Do you know we eventually thawed out? Climate changes happen. They earth will forever be in a state of change. Volcanoes ,earthquakes and climate changes. In ten or 15 years things might swing back. No one knows.
The recent hooplah about the US being solely responsible is a way to knock the steam out of American Capitalism. The Gov't knows better than to lock the country into a treaty that could expose US companies to law suits. Plenty of real pollution and environmental issues to be worked out for sure .
Blaming Americans is easy looking at yourselves it tougher and not as much fun.
We are a nation of 300 million. There are counties in some states that have a higher population than all of Britain. Co2 happens.
oh forgot one thing ...Al Gore is crazy
2006-12-07 01:24:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by CAE 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, Australians generate the most CO2 per capita, and I believe that New Zealand is one of the highest per capita generators of greenhouse gases (because they have a small population and a lot of methane-producing livestock).
As for whether Americans "buy" global warming, well there's 300 million of them, so naturally some do and some don't.
2006-12-05 15:50:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tim N 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
USA produces only 40% of CO². Actually, China and india are the best vendors to USA, with society and industrial agreement, we can say USA is also increasing ecological disasters everywhere just based on profit argue.
Our civilization is CO² addicted. Our social model of savage capitalism is strong and unfair, but Is spreading everywhere.
BUT Global economy depends of USA Economic Capital. Same scenario of 1929 would lead world into such terrible crisis followed by deep misery and wars. (What will happen in anear future with global climatic issues)
Cut emissions is just put deadline into a longer scale, because probably we are already over a no-return situation here. Keep profits, prepare society to handle next ecological crisis that will bring higher level of economic loss and a starving world is better than try to keep things down and give more time to our world. Its a winner strategy.
World politics, economial, industrial view is not based on Ethics or Fairgame, but based on principles of Machiavel and Nietzche.
Answer:
Why? Because its the winner strategy.
Better to solve this problem when its arrive than put economy into a worst level than actual status and try to keep things ok meanwhile probably will not be possible to avoid.
Ozone - much more simple still into a bad shape.
Easter Island - Rapa Nui - Best example about what Marx said: History repeats itself.
2006-12-06 07:06:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by carlos_frohlich 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because most Americans outside the big city's live decent respectable small town life's. It is the government who are afraid to admit to global warming. Your senators are in the pocket of the oil, car and drug companies. They don't care so long as there fat pay checks keep coming in. As for U.K why most of our M.Ps have directorships with c02 emitting companies. Beats me how you can do 2 jobs at once, if your meant to be servicing the best interests of country by being an m.p. Oh I forgot it's an non attending directorship, they pay you for not attending lol.
2006-12-05 15:58:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by naplusultra 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
america has gone to great lengths to minimize industrial pollution since the mid-20th century. the risk of global warming is exacerbated more by depletion of rain forests and green belts than airborne pollutants. the question isn't whether global warming is real or not -- it is of course, and has always been a factor long before humans were on earth. it's a cyclical rhythm. the question is what is the additional impact of human activities, and will it hasten/prolong the natural cycles of warming/cooling
2006-12-05 15:51:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by Super G 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Because they are all stupid. Look at all the stupid whinging bastards on here. Listen you stupid morons, you are the cause. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Although no don't bother, stuff your heads up your own backsides and wait till the Atlantic floods your major east coast cities. The Gulf floods the Mississippi way up to past the Missouri. Most of Florida vanishes. Then maybe you'll see what the rest of the world knows.
But hey, we won't furking care.
2006-12-05 15:45:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
You gave the answer. Because they generate most of the CO2 .
2006-12-05 15:54:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think it's got nothing to do with them caring for the environment and everything to do with them caring about their economy! Making the sorts of changes that would be required would be costly and what would happen to the oil market if the world no longer relied on fossil fuels??
It's all about the $$$ and nothing else!
2006-12-05 15:43:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by kerrywba 1
·
1⤊
1⤋