Im very skeptical about climate change but anyone who puts the issue of dog poo above that of the planet must be a bit mad.
2007-10-01 01:20:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by TruthBeTold 2
·
5⤊
1⤋
Having skirted around the edges of politics back in the 80s, I can tell you that there is a lot more to it than what the public wants right here - right now. If you remember back, the old Liberal Party (pre-SDP merger) repeatedly put forward manifestos that claimed they would do the little things that ordinary everyday people wanted doing. They never got elected. The intersting thing here is that the poll does not make climate change disappear. It does not prove that climate change reports are overexagerated, it just shows that 56% of a 'group' of people 'believe' that it's overexagerated. Back in 1987, there were polls right through the General Election that predicted that Neil Kinnock would win a landslide victory over Margaret Thatcher. I don't remember Mr Kinnock taking up residency in Number 10 though. Two things ... Firstly, polls can't be trusted to give accurate figures about anything. Secondly, there are some things that we simply don't know enough about to be trusted to make rational decissions on. For that reason, we elect leaders to do this for us. Humans have a wonderful ability to bury their heads in the sand and say things like, "It's OK, I won't catch AIDS", or, "This whole BSE thing is just a load of crap and I'm going to carry on eating beef". So it's easy to say that global warming is a myth. But the fact remains that our weather is behaving abnormally. Our winters are getting warmer and our summers are getting wetter. The evidence of climate change is all around us. This doesn't mean that other issues like terrorism, anti-social behaviour and dog crap on the streets aren't important. After all, what is the point of saving the world if the society we live in breaks down? Whether it be trying to get the politicians to press the US to start acting against global worming, or getting the government to increase funding for centres for people with learning difficulties (instead of closing them all down), every issue that faces our society - be they things that can be solved quickly, or things that take generations of work to achieve - are all important to make our society a safe and decent place for us all to live in. Certainly, if all the higher paid politicians were to take a 30% cut in salaries (something they could all easily afford to do) they could fund the focus groups to deal with many of these smaller issues. But the idea of a 'poll' being enough for the government to change it's policies is simply laughable. All the government needs to do is to comission a poll of it's own. The company that does the poll can find the right 'cross-section' of the British public to get the result the government would want to see.
2016-03-19 03:05:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Lauren 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
So your basically saying that the government should take notice of ill-informed members of the public, who would rather believe politically motivated misinformation from people like Martin Durkin, than the vast majority of scientists who have spent a large part of their lives researching climate change?
Climate change is a fact and the human contribution to it through emission of green house gases is overwhelmingly supported by the evidence that has been amassed during the past 40+ years of research. If the government decided to ignore it, they would be failing the entire country.
I think you'll find that there isn't a single political party of any consequence in the UK, who does not now accept that climate change is not only a fact, but an urgent problem which needs to be addressed quickly and decisively at a national and international level. Even right wing parties like UKIP and the otherwise highly objectionable BNP now have policies aimed at combating climate change.
The thing that worries me most, is that of all the political parties in the UK, the current Labour government are the ones who seem least keen on taking genuine measures to deal with climate change, since they continually try and shift the responsibility to the general public and the measures they do advocate are no where near enough to fully address the problem.
Thank goodness the scientific community are developing "geo-engineering" methods of actively reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere, which in combination with measures to reduce carbon emissions, might just save the planet.
2007-10-01 02:11:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Spacephantom 7
·
5⤊
2⤋
Not a chance when he has a blame free way are increasing taxes.
Most people understand climate change is happening because it is always happening, always was, and always will be, it is a fundamental part of how our planet works.
The part that the majority are sceptical about is whether human activity is contributing to it, or not, and if yes, to what degree.
Is man causing climate change? certainly not, It happens anyway.
Does man contribute to climate change? yes
To what degree? Our contribution is minute because the human contribution to total CO2 is only about 2.5% and CO2 accounts for only 3% of the greenhouse effect, and the greenhouse effect is only one small part of the total climate picture. If we stopped fossil fuel use altogether it would hardly make a measurable difference to the temperature.
We are right to be concerned about it, but we should be learning to adapt to it rather than wasting large amounts of money in a futile attempt to stop it.
2007-10-02 04:45:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by mick t 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
If Brown listened to the public you'd be in for a shock. The British public overwhelmingly support taking action on climate change.
From the same survey that the BBC uses: Only 1% of the UK population do not think the climate is changing. Only 3% of the UK pop aren't concerned about climate change. The majority of the population believe climate change is affecting their health, the UK should take a leading role, action needs to be taken now, the government should lead the action etc etc.
The BBC are usually pretty good with their reporting but in this case the article you linked to has led them down. It's based on a much more detailed report called 'Turning Point or Tipping Point' in which the British public were asked many questions about climate change.
The public are not skeptical of climate change and view it as the number one global issue, terrorism being second.
The references to grafitti and dog mess are taken out of context, the question concerned relates only to local issues (e.g. parks, trees, noisy traffic etc).
If you want to read the ORIGINAL and therefore unbiased and accurate report please ask and I'll e-mail it to you (I don't think it's available online, it's a large PDF file - approx 3.5Mb). If you wish to beleive that most of the public are skeptical of climate change then best not to read the report.
2007-10-01 06:54:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Trevor 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
I believe climate is changing but i don't believe man is big enough to cause it and i also don't believe that the temperature will keep warming till we fry, instead of blaming us and taxing us the Gov should be preparing us for what may happen.
Also if the Gov genuinely thought that global warming was a serious threat, then they would be doing something serious about it rather than just talking about it.
2007-10-04 12:48:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by willow 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The problem with Brown and climate change is that he is using it to create more so called green taxes; that is why people are angry and are more adverse of this situation thinking that is a political strategy only to raise taxes. And the worst thing of all, this taxes doesn't go to real stopping climate changes structure, instead of using it to subsided trains and buses making public transport more affordable or create biking or walking structure...That is the problem why people aren't believing in climate changes, they think is only created to raise tax!
This is my own personal opinion and I am doing all in my hands to make sure people know that it is real and it is afecting us right now; not only here but in other part of the world.
We have te power to make them listen to us, WHEN WE GO TO VOTE!!!!
2007-10-02 00:41:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by ogloriad 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
A politician will never listen to a member of the public. The simple reason for that is - they think they know everything and the great unwashed are just something they have to deal with at election times.
As far as Brown is concerned - the only thing he lkies more than power is to spend or should I say waste other peoples money. If he opposed 'climate change' measures, there would be a golden cow escaping. He can take money off people in the guise of fighting climate change and some people fall for it and give their cash willingly.
Politiicians are thieves and undesirables. As long as they are filling their own boots, they care for nothing or nobody (except themselves of course, but they tink they are important.)
2007-10-01 04:10:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋
The scientific evidence just continues to increase. Unprecedented melting of the Arctic, etc. 2007 is on track to be the warmest year ever, ending the nonsense about the unusually warm weather in 1934 (in the US) and 1998 in the world.
Even skeptical scientists like Richard Lindzen now admit that global warming is mostly man made. The few skeptical scientists left just disagree with the majority about how bad it will be.
There's a reason essentially every world leader thinks this is a problem. It's because it's a problem.
2007-10-01 02:30:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Bob 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
Seems doubtful to me. Doesn't he have a problem with even the proper description of Islamic terrorists?
2007-10-01 07:19:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋