Why do so many global warming advocates make this incorrect assumption?

Question

The incorrect assumption I am referring to is that if you do not believe the man made theory of global warming that you must not be environmentally friendly.

Answer 1

I don't really understand the debate. It seems a very good thing to do things to have cleaner air and cleaner water and develop alternative fuel so we aren't relying on oil in the Mideast in the future-or Venzuela now. In other words, if we are "environmentally friendly", why does it matter? Let's just do the right thing thing so our kids can play outside without fear of an "air quality risk day". I don't know that it matters whether reducing vehicle emissions stops global warming-but it would definitely be good for all of us.

Corporations that don't have to clean up after themselves are actually being subsidized by you and I. That's not "anti-capitalist"-it should be good business to include all of your costs rather than have everyone else pay for it. If you can't make a profit, should they be in business-when we know others can be good stewards and responsible, yet still make a nice profit.

Answer 2

Global warming is not an assumption. It is a scientifically backed deduction based on measurements and data.
Virtually every major scientist in the world and every research organization has agreed on the existence of global warming.
The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a study, with input from 2,000 scientists worldwide, finding that the certainty on man-made global warming had risen to 90 percent. " per CBS news.


Some of the empirical data that backs up global warming are the sustained and rapid disappearing of glaciers and ice caps in the world.
Also included in this data are the hotter and more intense summers and higher temperatures of the major bodies of water surrounding the continents.

The accepted theory as to why Global Warming has not been acknoledged as yet is because those businesses who are contributors would suffer monetarily should they have to conform to a higher standard of performance. At this point they would rather spend the money to fight the battle on the PR front denying the existence of the problem.....putting off the inevitable fix they will have to perform.

Answer 3

I really don't know; only the Sith deal in absolutes.

I don't find the correlation between the two, and I believe global warming is also man-made (although I wouldn't describe myself as an advocate).

I think that regardless whether you believe in global warming at all, how does it not make sense to use less energy and less fuel? You get more exercise and save money on gas and electricity bills.

Answer 4

I believe that the majority of people that believe that we are responsible for global warming are what I call headline readers the rest fall in the category as anti-capitalist many Americans don't realize that millions of people that use to champion communist and Socialist have gravitated towards environmentalism after the former has been discredited.

So under this guise they can attack capitalism without close scrutiny. I am for a cleaner environment using our technology because it is the right thing to do not because some extremist group has commandeered it for their cause

Answer 5

the main severe techniques that the folk can wrestle international warming is getting rid of their older variety automobiles (1979 Buick) because of fact, older automobiles emmitt extra poisonous fumes into the air. Its obtrusive that the extra technological progressed a vehicle is, the fewer risky gases it emmitts. A vehicle that grew to become into outfitted 3 or 4 years in the past would be extra economic gadget friendly than a vehicle that grew to become into assembled 35 years in the past. for best populated cities inclusive of manhattan, Bus and Taxi companys might desire to replace present day automobiles with automobiles that are powered with the help of hydrogen or electrical energy. purely think of, if each substantial city used the Toyota Prius as taxi's, there may well be a decreased point of pollutants, and additionally taxi fares might desire to be considerably decrease as properly.

Answer 6

I'm not convinced about global warming but I don't deny the possibility of it occurring. I'd just like to see more proof of todays examples of warming, such as the melting of the polar ice packs, as being an ongoing and permanent situation as opposed to being temporary. We've had many phenomena during the course of my long lifetime that were of a "here today, gone tomorrow nature."

Answer 7

I think the problem here is we should simply be talking about pollution. Whether or not there is global warming there is man-made pollution and we need to start doing something more about it.

Answer 8

well, if you are environmentally friendly, you need to have some clue as to what is and is not friendly to the environment, as well as what traumatic event it is going through - if you had a friend who had cancer and you didn't believe it (it's a man-made theory), how could you really be a friend? Same idea.

Answer 9

The majority of global warming advocates are actually just using this as front for anti-corporatism. They are far less concerned about the reasons behind global warming or climate change as they are about backing their anti-corporate agenda. If your theory doesn't help attack capitalism you will be told you are anti-environment.

Answer 10

Because global warming advocates like Al Gore are exceptionally stupid people...

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm