Some responses were really shocking! So in response to the non believers.......N.Y. state has issued an air quality warning! Pollution is high and some may have difficulty breathing! WOW!!! BREATHING! to say that our oxygen is'nt so good. Also Pakistan is flooded and Europe is to expect killer heat waves and floods! So who believes every lil part that each individual does to conserve energy, recycle, not drive, plant a tree, speak out & spread the word, will help? Do you think you can do your part???
2007-06-27 01:14:40 · 10 answers · asked by gypsyrose8375 4 in Environment ➔ Global Warming
What does pollution have to do with global warming? The world also never experienced killer heat waves or floods in the past? Are you saying it is a new phenomena? If floods are recurring more often do you have any stats to back up your claim? The suns intensity have been at the most for over 1000 years. Is this a coincidence?
2007-06-27 02:33:04 · answer #1 · answered by eric c 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Of course we should but this is something that I find disturbing. In WV, the coal mining center of the US for high sulfur coal that is used in smokestack industries, some people proposed wind turbine electricity based on the wind and elevations in WV. It was there and working well. So what do you thing happened? Do you think that the mighty coal industry with its lobbyists and lawyers stopped it? No. Environmentalists fought it to the Supreme Court of WV and got the turbines stopped. Wind is clean energy, no pollution, no use of fossil fuels. They feel that the turbines are ugly and represent a danger to birds who might not notice them and fly into them. They fought, like lawyers do, about permits and licenses etc. And they took the money of land developers who opposed the turbines because they had purchased property to big million dollars chalets for the fatcats of industry to vacation there. Green accepted the greenbacks and played along to stop clean energy. So when we talk about global warming we need to understand that not only has industries failed the environment so has what we called the environmental movement. First, big name ecologists fail us because they use the support for the environment and sell it to politicians. There is no reason to believe that the Democratic Party is the green party, it is also the party of labor and that is smokestack industries and the automobile. Big name green groups are more political than they are environmental and they have retarded the effort to deal with global warming. Al Gore is the biggest phony in the mix. Secondly, ecologists are often so nutty they would rather just protest and party then make gains in the green effort. The movement away from the oil addiction is retarded by the "green" groups who oppose wind, oppose hydro, oppose nuke, and even oppose solar. The WV case is a good example of green people defeating a positive move toward clean energy. We have met the enemy and it is us.
Oh yeah and anyone who thinks global warming is not real is a buffoon and quoting industrial toads and fox news is not a really good source of information on the subject.
2007-06-27 09:55:20 · answer #2 · answered by Tom W 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Global warming and pollution in NY are not necessarily the same issue. While something might be done about the air quality that doesn't mean that it will have a positive impact on global warming. That's been the real argument on both sides of the GW issue.
2007-06-27 11:22:35 · answer #3 · answered by 55Spud 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While we can all do our part to reduce pollution, the issue is not that simple. NASA's own studies indicate that our own Sun is getting hotter (Don't believe me? check with NASA.) and it is not very likely that the inhabitants of planet Earth had anything to do with the Sun burning hotter now than it did 20 years ago. Unfortunately, most of the "global warming" alarmists (like "The Weather Channel" editors) fail to ever mention that the Sun is getting warmer.
In other words, even though man is likely contributing to the problem, we can only do so much. In addition to our learning to be 'ecologically friendly', we also need to learn how to adapt to the impact and effects of the Sun's higher temperatures, and not simply be so arrogant to believe that man is powerful enough to cause all of this.
Again, check with NASA about the solar temperatures rising. In addition, http://harvard.edu/ hosts web sites with a lot of NASA research data on it. I've not heard any of the major media news programs mentioning any of this, and I am baffled as to why.
2007-06-27 08:29:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've been doing "my part" for longer than you have been alive. Why is it that you need or that you think other people need the threat of destruction to do their "part"? Would your parents have to be dying of terminal cancer before you loved them or treated them well? Would you love them less if they were perfectly healthy?
Frankly, it's rather insulting to hear the histrionic pleas of impending disaster just so we will all do our part. If this were just a matter of personal conservation, I don't think you would have that great of a problem achieving eventual voluntary environmental standards. That's not at all what is being proposed.
Do me a favor and read this article:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,2093850,00.html
then please feel fee to show me some real results on a global scale from a bureaucratic/government solution viewpoint. (Again, I know all about community conservation efforts; I encourage EVERYONE to participate as much as they can.)
2007-06-27 12:19:59 · answer #5 · answered by 3DM 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I studied climatology in the 1980's and have been aware of how we've been affecting the climate for some time, as such I've been 'doing my part' for a good many years now.
Worth keeping in perspective - not every adverse weather event can be blamed on global warming. There always has been and always will be such events. However, across the planet the number and intensity of these adverse events has been steadily increasing, in comparison the nukber of purely natural events such as volcanoes and earthquakes has remained steady.
2007-06-27 08:24:23 · answer #6 · answered by Trevor 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Trevor is right. Short term weather should not be blamed on global warming.
Every serious global warming scientific study discusses increased solar radiation, and the carefully measured data. In the past it was a main factor in climate change. These days, it's only about 10% of the problem. The data:
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png
The bottom line:
"While evidence suggests fluctuations in solar activity can affect climate on Earth, and that it has done so in the past, the majority of climate scientists and astrophysicists agree that the sun is not to blame for the current and historically sudden uptick in global temperatures on Earth, which seems to be mostly a mess created by our own species."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258342,00.html
2007-06-27 08:52:24 · answer #7 · answered by Bob 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Are you going to blame ever weather episode on global warming? Was the dust bowl in the 30's caused my global warming? Get real.
2007-06-27 10:00:07 · answer #8 · answered by John Galt 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Definitely
2007-06-27 08:22:15 · answer #9 · answered by Becca♥ 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What are China, India and Mexico doing to remedy the situation?
2007-06-27 08:40:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋