Does anyone else think it's ridiculous to use global warming as a political weapon?

Question

You can find scientists who say that yes, humans do contribute to and speed up this naturally occurring phenomenon, and you can find scientists who say that no, they don't.

The truth is, it's all speculation, because without knowing exactly how the earth would be without the allegedly offending activities (and whatever anyone says, we DON'T know that), there is no way to measure what the extent of the damage is.

It's sort of like those wiftos who claim that Bush is responsible for the lack of terrorist attacks in this country since 9/11. Unless you can prove there would have been successful terrorist attacks if someone else had been President, you really can't comment on this in any kind of educated way.

So my question remains... isn't it a little foolish to turn something like global warming into a big political issue? Don't we have more important things going on that we can attack one another over than the condition of the environment?

Answer 1

I fully support anyone who will quit talking about global warming. It cannot be proven or disproven, so talking about it over and over is like taking four left turns all day.

Answer 2

You can't equate the two sides because the one side is arguing that it should be able to tell the other side what it may or may not do, and the other is simply arguing for the freedom to continue to do what it wants to do.

The question is, who bears the burden of proof? In a free society you can't just curtail an otherwise free activity unless and until the people who want to engage in it prove that it doesn't cause some alleged harm - because then all you'd have to do to prevent someone from doing something is make up some alleged harm.

And if we were to allow for exceptions based on the severity of the harm alleged, the same people would just make up more severe allegations...... which is precisely what they've been DOING for the last few years.

I'm defending my FREEDOM against control by people who have been arguing for that control for countless reasons including the OPPOSITE of what they're alleging now!

The "hard science" does NOT prove that we cause global warming. It's been warmer than it is today, for several multi-century periods, when CO2 levels were LOWER. So, while CO2 does trap heat, there are clearly other, stronger factors at hand.

It MIGHT be partly us. It MIGHT be materially us. MIGHT is no more than you had 15 years ago and it is not enough to justify curtailing otherwise free, productive activity in a free society.

Answer 3

Buffoons

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070110-warmest-year.html

Answer 4

i think of it somewhat is somewhat stupid and short sighted to not undertaking approximately international warming/climate substitute. not unavoidably no remember if or not it somewhat is human brought about, or employing recycled lavatory paper to objective to minimize greenhouse gases, yet we could desire to be worrying approximately and initiate making plans for what is going to ensue whilst the aspects differences. and it will substitute. We see the adjustments occurring now. The climate has shifted distinct situations interior the previous. it somewhat is all sorts of conceitedness and hubris to anticipate the aspects to stay comparable to it somewhat is now. no remember your non secular or political ideals, the aspects WILL substitute, no remember if it somewhat is brought about by using human beings or not at that element won't remember a bloody fig. The Earth itself will honestly proceed to exist the aspects substitute, yet purely simply by fact the Earth survives does not advise we can. in spite of if human beings proceed to exist, it is going to make some tremendously harsh differences in our existence. in case you do not think of that climate substitute can impression human civilizations, I advise you seem into the way forward for the Maya, the Hittites, the Akkadians, the Egyptians, the classic Cambodians, the Anasazi, the Minoans, the Cretans, the Carthaginians and distinctive different civilizations that each and all and sundry collapsed following differences in climate. back then, human beings have been greater cellular, and whilst floods got here approximately, that they had certainly flow their settlements. Now, we stubbornly insist that places like New Orleans, Amsterdam and manhattan are inviolate, and shall proceed to be the place they are regardless of what happens. i've got self assurance they'll all go the way of Atlantis and Hibrazil. purely given which you're a Christian republican does not advise you would be waiting to respire water from now on effective than the tree-hugging environmentalist liberals. What makes you think of you're resistant to the effects of climate?

Answer 5

No, it's very clever to use nonsense as a weapon, especially if you can't be blamed when it is confirmed as nonsense.
It is not all speculation, we have all the records, during the period of greatest industrial expansion from '45 to '75 global temps fell dramatically in line w. the sun's reduced output during that period, (then we were terrified of 'global cooling'). From '75 to present solar activity has been up which gave rise to more plant life and hence CO2. The evidence you seek is that extra CO2 follows the sun's output.not vice versa.

Answer 6

You are correct in your observation that the global 'warming/cooling' issue is a political weapon. Remember they tried the 'cooling' side of it in the 70's and no one believed them. This time around, they have a couple of natural occurances to point to and yell "the sky is falling!"...i.e., hurricane Katrina ..never minding all the other hurricanes in the past couple of centuries...Anyway, they are using the natural temperature cycle of this planet to garner power and money to better control the population at large.

Answer 7

Global warming is something made up by the Dems to try an influence the peoples vote. By creating a a paranoia in the public the Dems can say that if you vote for them they can solve it for you, because the Dems are the only one who can defeat global warming. In reality though there was an article in the ny post that stated only 3 out of millions of scientists were able to prove global warming.

Answer 8

Not being able to see the forest for the trees?

Or would you prefer they all be burned up?


It's what I get out of your do away with the government so that the corporate war, and pollution junkies can continue to spin their tall tales that 19 arab "hijackers" and Osama Bin Laden defied the laws of physics on 9-11-01. And that WTC7 just decided to implode itself being a non-terrorist event.

Answer 9

what's more important that our planet? turning a quick dollar, as so many seem to think. anyway as far as blame for the 9/11 attacks i think it's more disgusting that bush tried to blame clinton for them, i mean come on......

anyway I think global warming is being blown way out of proportion. but i also think we should be changing our energy consumption patterns too. I mean, it's not going to hurt anything if we stop putting so much crap into the atmosphere is it?

Answer 10

Global warming caused by humans (if true) is a serious problem for all people on earth. It is not a political problem although some have made it such in an attempt to debunk it.

Answer 11

Were there repeated terrorist attacks in Clinton's time? (93 and 01 WTC) I guess so. If we didn't go to war, do you really expect people who want us all killed to sit back and do nothing for 6 years? Of course not. If a liberal gets elected and pulls out of the Mid-East, then you can bet that we will be attacked again. That's the sad truth, and liberals fail to see it, because they don't recognize the terrorists as evil.