There will always be those who blame man for all of the worlds woes, and others that fear technology and desire to return to simpler days like when they were young. Still others see this as an opportunity to gain control over others lives by raising taxes and witting new laws restricting freedoms. Think about the number of believers who want to force others out of their SUV's.
2007-11-07 23:44:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dr Jello 7
·
2⤊
6⤋
In the 50's (1950's) I started high school and we were told at that time the earth was in a warming trend. Not caused by anything we understood, just a natural cycle having to do with factors of nature, well removed from the purview of the human race. Many felt we were getting "close" to the peak and then the cycle would shift to one of a very gradual cooling. By close it was meant 50-100 years away.
Some didn't understand this and started predicting a more immediate return to a trend in the direction of a cooling cycle. They thought that the industrial revolution and the soot and ash, etc that was going into the air would block enough sunlight to reverse this warming trend much sooner than the predictions. Their predictions did not come true but if they had than these folks would have been thought of as the sears and sages of that day.
I believe that is what is going on today. Many predicting that we can stop this warming trend and if Mother Nature is kind enough to accomodate them, they could become the heros that saved planet earth. This could create a legacy for them and their future generations for 100's of years down the road.
I believe it is an attempt by some to time their words and predictions to something that may or may not happen. If it doesn't come true, than it will be forgotten just like the predictors of doom and gloom were forgotten in the 50's and 60's.
If the earth's cooling cycle kicks in, in the next 10-20 years everyone will be saying, thank goodness for the "action" of those who warned us, without them the planet would surely have breathed its last.
Personally, I find myself in quite a dilemma. I would like to see the human race cutting down on fossil fuel usage not because of any global warming it might cause but because it would contribute to better air quality. This could actually be a benefit to all of us who have to breath today and will have to breath for the next 1000 years (ie our children, grandchildren, etc)
But the fossil fuel industry has the world in its grip and their greed seems to preclude that they will not share their market with anyone if they can figure a way around it. I feel pretty hopeless about this and I am sure many share this hoplessness. It is as if they will sell what ever they can get out of the ground by hook or crook.
I strongly believe if everyone in the world boycotted the internal combustion engine, they would get laws passed that all highways need to be lite, 24-7 by 1000 watt light bulbs every ten feet, or what ever it took to use up their wares (ie oil etc).
Did they not get the government to to spend 100's of billions to build our highway infrastucture to create the automoblie industry in the first place? And what else did we have to buy to use our cars on these highways? Three guesses and the first two don't count....lol What a marketing job.
2007-11-08 00:09:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by andyg77 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
What there is:
A load of technical jargon and information
A load of opinions in the following categories: Scientists, world leaders and the general public, who in turn are believers, skeptics, and deniers
A load of human activities that are negatively impacting the environment we rely on for "Nature's Services"
To be blunt -- the way you phrased your question leads me to believe you prefer that approach -- it doesn't matter whether you accept the premise or not. Public opinion has come around to the viewpoint that global warming/human-induced climate change exists and is a serious issue. This in turn is helping to drive world leaders into getting off their duffs and doing what should have been done a decade ago, when most predictions were less dire.
I've got about a dozen sites I usually pass along, but I thought you might take a closer look if I just offered a few. This is not something you can figure out by listening to the vocal few, or going online for a couple of hours. It's also not something we can ignore, because the consequences of continuing to ignore what's happening are not very pleasant.
Think of future generations trapped in a world environment not of their making. If they are facing conflicts because of diminished resources, is that rubbish too?
2007-11-08 01:15:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Coldest winter where? Certainly not where I live. Right now it is 70 degrees outside. The normal temp for this time of year here is 55.
Keep in mind it is called GLOBAL warming not LOCAL warming. Just because it was cold where you live does not mean the average GLOBAL temperature is not increasing. Try paying more attention to the words you read...they actually mean something.
2007-11-08 06:54:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sordenhiemer 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Obviously you've got a much more mature perspective on the issue of global warming than most of the world's most renowned scientific communities.
After all, the only thing that matters to you is the short-term. So what if polar bears become extinct; if remote Eskimo tribes vanish; if there are no more rain forests; if millions of insect species no longer exist; if the caribou migratory routes are destroyed by more oil drilling; if your grandchildren have to wear gas masks in order to breath fresh air; if there's not sufficient clean water to sustain the Earth's population; if your refusal to REduce, REuse and REcycle results in landfills leaching toxic poisons into our groundwater; if wetlands no longer survive for the sanctuary of birds and waterfowl; if most of Bangladesh and parts of Florida gradually disappear underwater; if severe flooding, hurricanes and tornadoes begin to strike all of the major metropolitan along all the coasts of both major oceans? So what? It's all about YOU...the hell with your descendants. And why put any faith at all in what intelligent scientists are saying?? -RKO- 11/08/07
2007-11-08 02:18:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by -RKO- 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Actually, this Summer in the US was slightly drier and warmer than average. I'm not sure where you're getting your info from, but I'd find a new source if I were you.
Also, this fact is completely irrelevant because we aren't talking about US warming here, we're talking about =global= warming. The US doth not the globe make.
What climate scientists look for in temperature and precipitation are trends. One cool and wet or warm and dry Summer doesn't make a global trend.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2007/perspectives.html
2007-11-08 01:29:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by SomeGuy 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
Yes, its BS.
Just ask a global warmer to explain the impact of the thermohaline conveyor, what its doing now, and why it is never cited on reports from the AL GORE bandwagon.
Ask them if CO2 is a contributor, not a product of global warming, how that is recorded, and why that matters.
Ask them about the global cooling cover of Newsweek magazine from the 1970's.
2007-11-08 03:00:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Elliott J 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yep! Too undesirable they're utilising this as a skill for a one international government in can charge of the international financial gadget variety of like the UN who ought to no longer even take care of their own checking account and that they choose for to regulate who manufactures what in step with stupid 'carbon credit'? provide me a destroy. the aspects isn't a thermostat which would be controlled or willed to act in a particular way each and daily. it rather is the reason we've common temps the checklist lows and highs and something in between in common. i'm no longer able to tell any distinction in a 1degree improve in temps in my own abode much less around the completed freakin planet. I shop analyzing solutions that talk or over inhabitants and we are able to by no skill sustain our improve and feed all of those people. it somewhat is rubbish additionally by using fact the comparable difficulty replaced into suggested interior the 70s. right this moment we make the comparable quantity of nutrition on 40% much less land so tell me we are able to no longer feed the extra new people. start is a blessing no longer a burden with the aid of ways. include new life and enable them to have of venture to prosper or fail on their own. As for extinctions of species extra have died than presently stay now so guy ought to no longer be in charge for each and all of the extinctions that ensue. some species will overtake others and that i think Darwin isn't required analyzing anymore.
2016-10-15 11:14:04
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
See what effect you have on your planet: What you do today will effect many generations from now.
http://www.earthlab.com/carbonProfile/LiveEarth.htm?ver=14
I rated a score of 170, and I am not a tree hugger, I am someone who cares about what I do that effects others.
And for those who don't believe in global warming, even if it somehow is not true, how can you be so selfish as to take and not give back a little. The planet is not here for you and you alone.
Our society is one of 'consumerism' and 'throwaway' goods.
Think before you act is all I saying, and help the world a little.
2007-11-08 01:41:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by The Mentor 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
When you have weather changes in areas, drought, floods, snow or otherwise, increased temperature plays an important part of that.
Surface Temperature Monitoring was missing important information and buildings as well as development was considered to have minimal impact on climate change.
Why do they warn you in the hot summer sun to protect yourself from UV? UV is in effect burning buildings, causing them to generate extreme heat and in some cases close to boiling temperature.
It couldn't be seen with the naked eye, go to http://www.thermoguy.com/globalwarming-heatgain.html and see advanced thermal imaging showing the heat generated.
Cities dumping that heat into the atmosphere will change weather locally and other places.
2007-11-08 01:27:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Global warming can be measured and has been empirically proved, so there is no doubting it.
What I do doubt is man's role in it. I think that global warming is explained by an upswing in long term temperature cycles in nature. Man has no influence on it, or maybe an infinitely small and neglectable one.
2007-11-08 04:19:14
·
answer #11
·
answered by Hi y´all ! 6
·
0⤊
0⤋