No, I don't encourage them at all. If they want to debate, this isn't where issues like that are decided. Even if they were right, their posts are in an inappropriate context.The other people who are here want to talk and learn about an issue almost the entire world considers important. Just because there are people who disagree doesn't give them a right to interfere as much as they try to do. Let me give you an analogy.
Suppose you are in a theatre and a fire alarm goes off. You and the other people file to the nearest exit as you've been taught. You find the exit blocked by a small number of people who won't let the rest out. They tell you
"Are you stupid? Why would you leave your seat just because a bell rings? Sheep! Robot! Go back and sit down"
"Do you think there is really a fire? It's a drill. We can tell with our Spidey senses. No one else knows but us, not even the guy ringing the bell. Go back and sit down"
"Are you an idiot? Don't you know that the people in charge of fire alarms are ignorant lying jerks you should not listen to? Anyone in charge of anything is an ignorant liying jerk who should not be listened to. Go back and sit down"
"That bell went off in the 1970's and there was no fire. That proves there's no fire now. Go back and sit down".
"Anytime you hear that bell, pay no attention to what the people who own the theatre and the bell have told you. Do only what we say. We hate people who own theatres and bells. Now go back and sit down!"
"We are smart and everybody else is stupid. If anybody doesn't think so they are ignorant lying Nazi Communist Treehugging Christian Liberal Sheep Robot Leftist Al Gores, all of them! Go back and sit down."
I look at the people who come here to block discussion of the area topic with these same types of arguments, much as I would the thugs at the theatre exit. They have no right to make my decisions for me, or interfere with people not bothering them, who are behaving in a way deemed appropriate by the relevant owners (in this case, Yahoo, not the theatre manager). They are a more dangerous nuisance here, because Global Warming is a more dangerous thing than a burning theatre, whether they agree aor not. The fact that this information comes from Global Warming experts does not convince me that it is wrong as it does them.
2007-10-04 06:38:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Forgive me, for saying this, but I think most of you are missing the point. It does not matter, whether the Global Warming Issue is correct.
Now that sounds quite a radical point, so let me back it up.
I personally believe global warming exists, but if it doesn't the following questions still exist. Is my lifestyle:
A)sometimes Wasteful and
B)is it Sustainable
The answer to those questions is sadly A) yes and B) no.
Last night, I left my computer on. Why ? Because I was too lazy to turn it off. I wasted some of the earths valuable resources, because I am lazy.
The other day, I bought some apples, they were flown in from South Africa, and yet the shop sold perfectly good apples from my own country (UK). What a waste of energy
In a finite world, there can only be a finite amount of resources, and therefore every time we use them, we leave less for the next generation.
There is only a certain amount of raw materials in the world, if we want a brand new car, then we will use some of the valuable metal ore, leaving less for our children to use.
Each car journey we take, uses up some of the limited supply of oil. And yet we all have to admit, that we sometimes use the car, when we could have walked.
Global Warming is only an issue in that, it says the problems will occur in the next 20 to 50 years, rather than in a 1000 years.
We still need to think about how we can make our lives less wasteful and more sustainable.
Yours
Andy
2007-10-06 01:36:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by Andrew C 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
So global warming is true!
So what?
The fact that the Earth has warmed slightly over the last 30 years or so – and that mankind may have contributed a little to that warming – means what exactly?
Now it’s your turn to come up with weak arguments to try and support the view that global warming is something that we should be worried about.
As ever with global warming - don't believe the hype.
:::EDIT:::
Can I just point out that ‘Tuba in the Rose Parade’s “fire alarm in a theatre” analogy is a very poor one.
Firstly, a fire alarm has a very well known and understood meaning. Upon hearing it, everyone would leave the building as a precaution, regardless of whether or not they believed a fire actually existed.
Second, it’s important to note that they can do so without any cost to themselves – which is a significant point. If they believed that leaving the building would incur a significant financial penalty, they would want to know that the fire alarm was genuine, and not a false alarm, before they took flight. Thus they would remain where they were until such time as they saw flames, or at least smoke.
This is the situation we have with global warming. There are a very few vocal individuals, Hansen, Gore, etc. who are telling us that we are facing a catastrophe. But there are huge numbers of climate scientists in the world who are, for the most part, remaining conspicuously quiet on the subject. If they agreed with Tuba in the Rose Parade that “Global Warming is a more dangerous thing than a burning theatre”, wouldn’t they all be parading on the streets, warning us of the dangers? What conclusions should we draw from the fact that the majority are not?
Thus, in the absence of the Global Warming equivalent of flames, or even smoke, most sensible, thoughtful people are correctly adopting a wait and see attitude.
Tuba in the Rose Parade also says “They have no right to make my decisions for me”. Nobody is making any decisions for you. They are simply exercising their right to free speech. Who are you to deny them that?
2007-10-04 14:01:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by amancalledchuda 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Find me a brick wall to bang my head against!
Global warming is real, even GWB agrees with that.
Global temperatures are rising.
The debate is whether it is a natural occurance or influenced by human activity.
The term global warming is very misleading and distracts from the real issues.
2007-10-04 06:20:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by 203 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Irony #1 - that global warming skeptics make such poor arguments as to confirm the credibility of anthropogenic global warming.
Irony #2 - that in a question where you mock the intelligence of global warming skeptic arguments, global warming skeptics exclaim 'you're right, of course global warming is false!'.
Can it possibly be a coincidence that so many global warming skeptics are so slow in the head?
Personally while I agree that many skeptics confirm the credibility of AGW theory, I would prefer to encourage them to educate themselves about the science behind global warming than encouraging them to continue making foolish arguments.
2007-10-04 06:35:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dana1981 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
there are several California towns that are seeking Federal assistance because their temperature are COOLING, endangering their citrus crops. Al Gore notwithstanding, the THREAT of global warming is a CROCK dreamed up by a bunch of goody two shoes Liberals who have no real issues to talk about. Wise man speak because he has something to say; Liberal speaks because he has to say something
2007-10-04 06:18:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mike 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Global warming is true. The pathetics are the pseudo scientists and politicians who think we can solve the problem by installing efficient light bulbs or taxing 4x4s. We need far more radical solutions than that and need to think on a global scale.
2007-10-04 06:12:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Come along now,if you have products to sell that benefit you,anything goes If we are that bothered about cars etc,stop making them.Instead of wasting thousands debating just close the refineries.No more speed traps,no more high speed villains,holiday by bikes,but profit sees no boundaries,and you can buy any data you want.
2007-10-05 06:00:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
It is true that the world is getting warmer, but if you look at the last 4.6 billion years that the world has been in creation the levels that everyone is talking about as harmful to the planet are grossly understated. We are at our lowest levels of CO2 in the last 460 million years, but what gets me is that water vapour is the wost element in the enhanced greenhouse effect and no one reconises it as so.
Therefore the current levels global warming, toxins and unlocked carbon will not really make any difference to the planet........but it will to us!!! Our actions are killing ourselfs, but our greed will make us continue
2007-10-05 00:10:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Farmer 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
George Bush has played down global warming to benefit big businesses that pollute our environment. Someone would have to be a fool not to believe we have global warming.
2007-10-04 06:24:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by oldhag 5
·
3⤊
2⤋