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

If everyone that so passionately believes global warming is caused by human pollution took the following steps:
1) Stop using electricity.
2) Stop using anything that uses an internal combustion engine.

Would it slow the "global warming" phenomenon? Or is it just a fact that the earths climate is cyclical?

2007-04-05 07:07:27 · 10 answers · asked by howellaa 2 in Environment

10 answers

The earth's climate is cyclical.
Liberal assertions about global warming are just their latest distraction. They protested global cooling in the '70s, so this was the logical next step.

Anyone who believes in human-caused global warming should follow your measures. If not, they are totally hypocritical and full of b.s. (like most liberals on most issues).

2007-04-05 07:16:24 · answer #1 · answered by t_o_w_e_r_i_n_g 3 · 2 0

It would definitely help stop global warming. Millions of people across the globe believe in global warming, and if they all stopped using energy produced by fossil fuels it would have a dramatic affect. It is a fact that the earths climate is cyclical. In our current ice age we go through periods of glaciation and interglacation. The inter-glaciation period generally last for about 10,000 years and then the glaciation begins again. In our current ice age (the last 600,000+ years) we have never had temperatures or CO2 levels this high, or increasing this rapidly. Not only that but CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for more than a century, so the affects of its discharge compound over time. Our current inter glaciation has been going on for some 8,000 years now. Based on the general trend, one would expect temperatures to begin falling as we approached the next natural glaciation period. However, since the industrial revolution this has not been the case and this is a result of anthropogenic activities.
If you are worried there are many things that you can do to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that you release without significantly altering your lifestyle. Many utilities offer green energy, that has been produced in a sustainable way (wind or solar, etc) this is sometimes available for less that 2 cents more per kilowatt hour. Check with your utility provider. Also taking shorter showers and hang drying your clothes can save you on your gas bill. Finally when driving drive the speed limit, and turn of your car at a long red light, when your car is stopped it gets 0 MPG, and sitting with your car on for 10 seconds wastes more gas than restarting it. Or even better if it is convenient walk or bike!

2007-04-05 08:11:05 · answer #2 · answered by jmh11x2 2 · 0 0

Part of the problem is that people listen to the hype and our poor school children get to learn the Gore type "facts" are the gospel truth and are given no chance to form an opinion. In 2003, it was recognized that the sun's energy output had risen .15% in 30 years and now we realize that Mars and Pluto are also heating up. Here's the article

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html


Al Gore has all the "green" companies he promotes and he cries wolf. He say the sea will rise 20 feet in 32 years, the science community says about 1 foot over about 4 centuries. There is just so darn much panic and so many "facts" that are totally exaggerated the the average person does nothing but panic.

2007-04-05 07:43:23 · answer #3 · answered by Gene 7 · 1 0

The impact of raising the minimum wage has been studied since its inception. It is proven that there are job-destroying features of a higher minimum wage. Estimates of the job losses of raising the minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.15 in 1996, ranged from 625,000 to 100,000 lost jobs. It is important to recognize that the jobs lost are mainly entry-level jobs. By destroying entry-level jobs, a higher minimum wage harms the lifetime earnings prospects of low-skilled workers. The proponents of a higher minimum wage argue that it is vitally important to raise it in order to improve the lives of poor workers. However, the raise will have only a limited impact on poor working families. For example; A single parent with two children living in California would gain only 26 cents from a 90 cent increase in the minimum wage. To put this gain in perspective, each minimum wage worker earns $4.25 (hypothetical) an hour brings home $3.92 for each hour worked once payroll taxes are deducted. The employer costs of a minimum wage worker is $4.58 an hour when the employers share of the payroll tax is included. If workers could take home the amount of money it costs the employer to hire workers, they could have 62 cents more per hour. Clearly, the California parent would be better off if the tax wedge were reduced, rather than increasing the minimum wage. In conclusion the campaign to raise the minimum wage will have little positive impact on the lives of poor people. Rather, it is a political measure that plays to a misunderstanding of the impact of higher minimum wages.

2016-05-17 23:29:48 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Defenitely increased human dependence on tech. has caused GW but thru tech. u can also limit the rate at which it increases . Therefore its better to decrease the rate at which we consume the resources or we can start looking for some other planet in the universe or make Mars a colony suitable for life so that we can exist otherwise if we don't stop , future is DOOMED .

2007-04-05 07:13:41 · answer #5 · answered by Devil 4 · 0 1

If you want to see what someone really believes, watch what they do instead of listening to what they say. If people say that there's a crisis coming so we all have to sacrifice and reduce our standard of living, but those same people fly every week and live in houses that use lots more energy than I do, what do you think they really believe?

2007-04-05 09:37:13 · answer #6 · answered by Faeldaz M 4 · 0 0

I think it would slow global warming, however, our lives don't allow us to make these decisions. Our infrastructure, jobs, and general means of survival depend upon these at the moment.

2007-04-05 07:13:37 · answer #7 · answered by ecolink 7 · 1 0

I agree with Gene.

I'm just waiting for Al Gore to do his part for the environment and stop breathing.

2007-04-05 08:46:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

we have the technology to make better decisions we don't though because it would cost money instead we spend billions of dollars every day on the war in Iraq

2007-04-05 09:09:50 · answer #9 · answered by Toy Soldier 2 · 0 0

you are being unrealistic, people can curb their use of these things...but believe me....the average person, especially the average American would NEVER give up these things.

2007-04-05 15:24:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers