Isn't it our grand parents, and great grandparents that should have been worried about this?
Look at all the grotesque excesses of America's 1950's (when it was perfectly socially acceptable to wear mink coats), etc..
Must of the blame lies on the industrial revolution. If we had started "green" then, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now.
Now it seems as if people are saying,"OK, be concerned. Go Green. Hurry Up." Ridiculous...
Why are we left with the burden of cleaning up their mess and wiping their "derrieres", when it could have been prevented.
Until corporate America cares about this issue, which the majority of them don't, nothing is going to change for the majority of us.
2007-10-17 20:44:21 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Global Warming
Yawn..... Yes of course this so called "global warming" is nothing more than an attack on the progress of man and his accomplishments during the industrial revolution.
It would be better if we just turned back time and lived in caves.
2007-10-17 21:13:36 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 1⤊ 7⤋
I haven't seen the Dibiase boys, but I like Cody Rhodes' potential. He's already got the gifts to be one of the great in-ring competitors of his time. He just needs some more time to mature and figure out his personality. I think if he can be half as good on the mic as Dusty is, there should be nothing stopping him from being a multi-time World champion. I don't like DH Smith. He has way too much of a baby face. I don't think he has the personality to make it. I saw him selling in that Cena/Orton vs. Raw match a few weeks ago, and he had some of the worst pained facial expressions I have ever seen. He oversold it too much. Of the ones I have seen, Cody Rhodes looks like he has unlimited potential. I think DH Smith will be at best a midcarder, Teddy Hart will never amount to anything because of his attitude, and I'll have to wait and see any other potential 2nd and 3rd generation wrestlers before I form an opinion on them.
2016-05-23 07:26:23 · answer #2 · answered by latrice 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We have a much higher global GDP now than we ever have and research has shown that it would only lake less than half a percent of that GDP to make significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The effect on the economy would be minimal although some dirty industries may suffer new ones would developed to cover for the losses. The cost of not doing anything would be proportionally higher than that of reducing emissions. The only problem then is if emissions are reduced and the trends reverse in however many years their will still be nutters suggesting that we should have never changes our ways. The first link shows the GDP vs emissions and the second is a good global warming info website.
2007-10-18 01:48:48 · answer #3 · answered by smaccas 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wrong place, wrong time. That is life. If the generation today can go back to the 50"s, it will be better for the planet. Much smaller homes, no air conditioning, One smaller car for a family. Much smaller appliances, many less electrical and electronics, more bicycles, Very few planes.
Corporations just give people what they want. No more, no less. Blaming them for GW is silly. Society controls what Corporations produce and what they pollute. Society demands more, more, more of everything and companies produce it. Society doesn't control population, then demands more for more people. The result is draining the natural resources and more pollution.
Actually Power plants and Industrial plants are much greener today than in the past. There is just so many more people to provide for and everyone demands much more.
No long ago, (25-30 years) our scientists were telling us we were going to block the sunlight and we were going to freeze due to particulate pollution.
2007-10-18 00:06:03 · answer #4 · answered by GABY 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually the generation of 60's and 70's had a real good time, what they failed at was the in anticipating tremendous population and tech. growth that would happen later and its impact on humanity as well as environment.
Our problems wouldnt be so BIG today if we had half the population of what we have today and we would be in a much better situation to manage the issues without being pushed to the brink of disaster.
So neither did they make any effort to control the population growth nor did they work hard towards finding more eco-friendly alternatives needed to sustain such huge mass of humanity. Today we have to work on both fronts adding to the fact that a majority of this human mass doesent even have education and hence are totally clueless about the gravity of situation (not that the educated ones are any better off)
Thats what happens, some people have all the fun and leave the others to clean up their mess.
2007-10-17 22:11:02 · answer #5 · answered by funnysam2006 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It seems that you're blaming the previous generation...
If it'll be for your convenience, you may put the burden on the next generation... that is if you don't have the conscience. And the same blame will be put against you by near future!
2007-10-20 19:34:24 · answer #6 · answered by mai2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This seems to be a common point of view among a particular type of climate change believers.
Your perspective is that you know that corporations are evil and should be blamed for something. People should be more diligent in blaming them.
Questioning the scientific basis for AGW seems immoral in the face of that.
2007-10-17 22:15:54 · answer #7 · answered by Ben O 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because, with mounting development all around the world, Man's impact on the environment has gotten to be very serious.
Good graph illustrating that:
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png
2007-10-18 02:49:02 · answer #8 · answered by Bob 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I love grotesque excesses of the 50's, that was before PCs , cell phones, cable TV and alot of other instant gratification you have at present. Furs was something you usually saw on the well to do and Hollywood types, not a very common item.
Although now I love to wear reindeer in cold weather.
Also they have been predicting global disasters of one form or another, usually it pertains to the excesses and evil of humanity, ever since then and before. Seems like ten years is the usual time frame and none of them have taken place, so if you want to sweat "Green" it's on your head not granpa's
2007-10-17 21:58:56 · answer #9 · answered by vladoviking 5 · 1⤊ 4⤋
FYI: People still wear dead animals. Leather, fur (fur trim on coats and bags).
But back then they didn't know the harm CFC's did to the environment. We have the technology now to realize what's happening to our world.
Now its up to the technologically advanced youth to find a solution.
It sucks, but thats the way it is.
2007-10-17 20:52:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
They didn't know it was bad and we are starting to get things done now.
2007-10-18 01:24:43 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋