I can't understand what the big fuss is all about. If you are a Christian, the Bible says that God put the Earth and all of its life, in our hands, to be treated properly. And, even if you are not a Christian, scientifically you must realize the importance of maintaining a healthy environment on Earth. What political significance does the "global warming" debate have? Why do some people think it is okay to pollute the air, water, and soil?
Why is this such a highly charged topic? And why does it seem to split liberals and conservatives?
2007-04-26 20:53:02 · 14 answers · asked by Joey's Back 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
> What political significance does the "global warming" debate have?
There is no "global warming debate". The reality of the coming global warming is the overwhelming consensus among experts. A few payed oil and coal lobbyists and a few fringe scientists doesn't make a "debate", more like a diversion. There's only a debate on the *severity* of the coming global warming. And *specific mechanisms* like the speed of the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic icecaps, and the possibility of the Gulf Stream slowing or stopping. Read the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report: "Climate Change 2007", which is a quite conservative document, vetted by appointed government representatives.
> Why is this such a highly charged topic?
Important energy industry vested interests.
> And why does it seem to split liberals and conservatives?
It doesn't. There's no split as long as both follow the facts. There's only a split between those who respect the facts and know the science, and those that don't. You won't find many conservative scientists willing to deny global warming.
2007-04-26 21:48:04 · answer #1 · answered by Erik Van Thienen 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I've been helping run a 360 acre farm for over 25 years and I have always been conscious of the environment. It's the same scientists from the late 60's that were screaming global cooling that are now screaming global warming and It's my fault because I drive a pickup truck that bugs me a little. The reason it has become a political dividing thing is because of people like Al Gore who have made global warming their religon. If man is so evil and especially those of us in the U.S. then why do they drive around in limo suv's and live in mansions that use 3 times the amount of energy as the average American? And he wants me to buy a yugo or a prea and read my paper by candle light and take cold showers to conserve power? All scientists who specialize in our temprature readings agree that the earth has warmed up 7 tenths of one degree in the last 100 years. Hey I can live with that. But go around scaring the shyt out of kids forcing them to watch his documentry filled with fake pictures and fake evidence to further some sicko's political career is shameful. His do as I say not as I do way of life can go take a flying leap. And if that is a form of polution then I am sorry.
2007-04-27 04:23:40 · answer #2 · answered by crusinthru 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because God himself in his infinate wisdom knew what people would do... The air, the water, the earth are under his control not ours. The rain washes the air, the rocks wash the water. When the sun burns out, and it will, what do you suppose man will do about it. Global warming is mans idea, kinda like the earth is flat! Scientist are wrong every day and they want you to send them money until they figure out who they are not "GOD" nor can they control the earth. Many scientist disagree with global warming. But you don't hear that on the news. All you hear is about how global warming (not proven) will destory. Nothing but Terroristic reporting.
2007-04-27 06:05:49 · answer #3 · answered by RonPaulOrganize2008 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I knew these Democratic PAC members who is attacking Gore and global warming. I told them this. I am not going to state if global warming is true or not, but Reducing CO2 emmission is in our best interest. I live in LA and we are fighting with Houston not to be number one in Air polution. REducing CO2 would also help us reduce smog and reduce our dependence in foreign fuel source. SOme times it takes an overexageration to get people to do the right thing.
2007-04-27 04:04:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is the same question I have asked several times, on both my accounts. Nobody seems to "get it" except you and Ed-Mike! It doesn't matter what or who causes global warming, we should still be taking care of our planet, and our wild life, and our people, and our trees, and our air, and our water, and our topsoil! Thank you for asking this question, maybe some people will understand it better, now that it has been put in a little bit different way! *sm*
2007-04-27 06:36:16 · answer #5 · answered by LadyZania 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You are right. Even if there was no global warming, it would still be worthwhile to stop pollution and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Already there are thousands dying from emphysema, asthma, lung cancer and other diseases caused by pollution. Reducing emissions from cars and manufacturing and power plants would be beneficial to our health.
2007-04-27 04:05:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree with you. We should take care of the earth.
The Liberal and Conservatives are going to find anything they can to disagree about. I am talking about the extremist when I say that. That will never end no matter what the topic is.
2007-04-27 04:01:45 · answer #7 · answered by BhitchyPrincess 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have no problem about saving earth. I do have a problem with people who don't practice what they preach but expect me to practice what they preach.
2007-04-27 05:26:52 · answer #8 · answered by wondermom 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, we're supposed to be good stewards over what we have been given.
2007-04-27 03:56:58 · answer #9 · answered by Docta Jones 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Simple they park theirs then i'll park mine...till then middle finger howdy to ya hollywood.
2007-04-27 04:08:05 · answer #10 · answered by horgurce 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋