Because it would cost big business money which would cut back on the campaign donations to the republican party, so the republicans will have no part of that.
2007-05-14 09:10:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by cheri b 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The world's Climate Science community was asked by the UN to study the issue and they have been working for at least six years to be a thorough as possible in their work.
This group of hundreds of the world's top climatologists recently released their report and it states that the climate is being changed as a result of human activities. When scientists work together in this way they are seeking a concensus, a statement thay can all agree on. They have done this. (Google UN CLIMATE STUDY 2007)
If global warming is happening, reversing it will caused sacrifice to everyone. No politician wants to be the one to say to the voters, you have to change your habits as a consumer. Imagine a presidential campaign with slogans like: "Get a smaller car, ride the bus, use less AC, live with less consumption." It would be suicide politically. Better to say: " There no problem, the worlds scientists are all liars, the icecaps and glaciers aren't melting. Listen to the guy on the radio tell you what you want to hear.
The politician's are gutless and most voters have other things on their minds than what the weather will be like in 20-40 years. It's easier for everyone if we just pretend it's not happening.
Since the oil companies, auto and electric power company's products are among the big sources of the air pollution they spend a lot of advertising money hiring fringe scientists who try to raise doubt about the truth of the UN Climate study. The same advertising companies doing this spent years causing confusion about the link between tobacco smoking and cancer. Science reached a consensus on this link in the 50's and laws weren't really in place until decades later.
You'll notice among these replies to your question, someone replied with a childish attack on Al Gore, no contrary facts, just a personal attack. Unfortunately, poorly educated people find it hard to examine evidence and listen to serious scientists. Politicians know this.
Finally,
Do you think it's possible that the fact that President Bush is a former Texas oil man, as is VP Cheney is also could have any effect on their unwillingness to address this issue?
Do a search on Cheney and Energy Task force. Our current energy policy was devised in secret by a group of oil executives and with no environmentalists. (clue: most environmentalists are Democrats)
Excellent question
2007-05-14 16:44:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bob K 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush addressed that issue today. Sounded pretty good I didn't get all the details but like everything in government the wheels turn slowly. Al Gore and co. are a bit too radical for me to believe completly, I read somewhere earlier that he has made a bit over 100 million so far off of his "the sky is falling" scare tactics. I just don't think that man has the power to change mother nature. But on the other hand there is certainly nothing wrong with putting less polution in the air.
2007-05-14 16:37:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by crusinthru 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Our government, this one, and to be fair, all of them.. do not take any action because most of the global warming problems are a result of oil in one form or another.
Big oil companies control our government.. the best most administrations can do is make silly promises and talk about other sources of fuel.
nothing will ever be done unless people do it themselves.. one way is to simply stop using gas so much... we can stop right away by using public transport more.. by heating our homes in other ways. There is just so many ways we can do things.. but we all know, until our governments actually take this seriously.. and they won't unless the people make them.. nothing will be done.
it is a sad and scary thing!
2007-05-14 16:08:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by Debra H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Don't know where you are living (America, I am assuming), but up here in Canada we are taking lots of action against Global Warming. The Clean Air Act was passed recently, the city of Toronto recently started the Green Box system which will be expnading to other cities in the future.
2007-05-14 16:07:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Justin L 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Many large companies and business organizations have taken the stance that the science of global warming is flawed, and therefore without merit. They have the money and the pull to see that it is not taken seriously by our government. Can you see GW's oil buddies supporting global warming research and spending? I think not.
I used to work in banking, and my former employer belonged to a PAC that held an anti-global warming stance. Go figure.
2007-05-14 16:03:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Caffiend 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Because global warming is not really an issue. The earth goes through cycles that last hundreds of years. We are just in a warm cycle. Al Gore is an idiot.
2007-05-14 16:06:49
·
answer #7
·
answered by tazzlair 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Why else? There's NO MONEY IN IT. Money can be made by polluting and using gas & oil.......think we could put up an Autoban system in all of our major cities and surrounding areas with all of the $ made in oil-----oh wait...that would save pollution, travel time, car accidents (which increase medical budgets), you name it---now why the hell would the govt want to go ahead and do a thing like that? There's just no money in it, baby, sorry.
2007-05-14 16:56:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Virgo 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
America really need to work harder on this issue--as well as the rest of the world because it is a GLOBAL problem. We all need air to breathe.
2007-05-14 16:07:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by Joan J 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
They think war is better or think they have other bigger issues to deal with and 'try there best' to keep those thoughts up high and keep others low in thinking 'one day we'll do something about them' and take action when it's too late.
2007-05-14 16:03:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋