English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

12 answers

Definitely. I think global warming is a much bigger problem that we realize and is obviously already affecting us. The earth's temperature is already beginning to rise, our weather is going haywire (stronger storms, unusual seasons) and major icebergs that are important are breaking off and melting. I think at this point there is nothing we can do to stop it, but I think if we were wise we would do whatever we can to slow it down while we have the chance.

2006-12-30 10:52:47 · answer #1 · answered by Steff 2 · 0 0

This is like saying, "Anyone else thinks we really need to really worry about running out of fossil fuel right now?" All the projections are in, and the picture looks real bad. Many people feel that we should do something about it before it gets much worse. I still can remember the days where people believed that we'd never run out of fossil fuels. How come you believe now that we will? Better information now, perhaps?

2006-12-30 19:34:24 · answer #2 · answered by Scythian1950 7 · 0 0

We can't solve it right now. If we put in maximum effort, we can begin to solve the problem in 100 years. We can also make the peak effects in the next 50 years or so considerably less.
The expert consensus is that the sooner we start doing something the less expensive it will be, and that we haven't in fact started doing anything.

2006-12-30 19:08:10 · answer #3 · answered by virtualguy92107 7 · 0 0

Not me. There is no evidence that the measured increase in CO2 levels is responsible, even in part, for the apparent increase in temperature. The earth's temperature has been changing throughout its history, and will continue to do so irrespective of anything that H. sapiens may try to do about it. Aside: the atmospheric level of CO2 during the dinosaur era was four times as high as it is now.

2006-12-30 18:52:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

It is simple logic--More CO2=more Carbon getting oxidised(burned-)=more release of Energy-more chloroplast required to convert CO2 back to Oxygen-more destruction of Forests (Green foliage) less chloroplas available--CO2 from Biological source alone(Including Dinosaurs) can not increase atmospheric CO2 as much as Motor vehicles of all varities-Disel Engines-Air-Planes-Industrial fuels-all kinds of Hydrocarbons are producing-It is absolutely detrimental to envoronment-we can not help-because we can NOT go to bulluck carts age-we can not put the clock back-it is an inevitable evil, as long as Carbon in any form is burnt.

2006-12-30 19:13:15 · answer #5 · answered by ssrvj 7 · 0 0

Yes and no. For Australia, where I am now, it needs to be worked on...hot and dry as hell down here.

For eastern Canada, where I was from, NO. They are having great summers, and snow-free winters now. It will eventually become the new Florida! Yahoo.

2006-12-30 18:56:29 · answer #6 · answered by jemulock 2 · 0 0

ya, you go boy! Trouble is, as my granddaughter tells her mother,as she hold up her hand in front of her face, and says'TALK TO THE HAND CAUSE THE EARS DON'T HEAR! Anyway that's how the politicians think. Got to get their attention, but the aren't going to see because 1 it will cost to much money or 2 it will be yaw to late, they better start looking now, before we all start living in houseboats.

2006-12-30 18:58:10 · answer #7 · answered by cprucka 4 · 0 0

No, not really. By the time global warming causes us any problems, I will no longer be alive, so why should I worry about it?

2006-12-30 18:52:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I've heard that the temperature is actually decreasing, rather than increasing. I'm not very sure about this, but this is indeed true where I live. I live in central California, and it definitely seems colder this year that the past three years.

2006-12-30 18:57:18 · answer #9 · answered by Jay 6 · 0 1

yes, Al Gore
:-)

2006-12-30 18:56:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers