Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off, I believe in climate change but I was wondering, if you don't believe in it then what proof do you need to know it is real? I mean, is it simply because the idea of it is offensive to you? The other thing too I find curious is that most people that don't believe it are conservatives. But, as a conservative, shouldn't we conserve the world we live in from being destroyed by the hand of man? Teddy Roosevelt was a republican and he conserved our lands by doubling the number of national parks in our country. Doesn't conservatism also equate to conservationism??
Hi elfstorage--
None. I believe in climate change.
I believe that the earth's climate is constantly changing. If it weren't, we'd have a real problem.
I do not believe driving a V8 engine has anything to do with climate change.
I refuse to pay any additional taxes, fees, or carbon credits just so someone like Al Gore or Rajenda Pachauri can make 10% off the top. Many of the biggest advocates of saving the planet from "climate change" are heavily invested in "green energy." Doesn't take a genius to say who will make off like a madman if you implement cap and trade: the guy who owns the company that buys and sells the credits.
And I do not believe any of the "climate scientists" because I read the East Anglia emails and they are deliberately fabricating and obfuscating the information in order to say something's bad: they need more money to do more research, and if they say it's all honky-dory, then they won't get any more research grants.
That said, I believe in recycling. I love the idea of taking care of our planet, we only have one after all. I don't waste electricity, water or any other resources, and I drive as little as possible. I believe in a clean environment and renewable energy. But I also believe in economic reality. And I can smell a scam from a mile off.
I believe that the earth's climate is constantly changing. If it weren't, we'd have a real problem.
I do not believe driving a V8 engine has anything to do with climate change.
I refuse to pay any additional taxes, fees, or carbon credits just so someone like Al Gore or Rajenda Pachauri can make 10% off the top. Many of the biggest advocates of saving the planet from "climate change" are heavily invested in "green energy." Doesn't take a genius to say who will make off like a madman if you implement cap and trade: the guy who owns the company that buys and sells the credits.
And I do not believe any of the "climate scientists" because I read the East Anglia emails and they are deliberately fabricating and obfuscating the information in order to say something's bad: they need more money to do more research, and if they say it's all honky-dory, then they won't get any more research grants.
That said, I believe in recycling. I love the idea of taking care of our planet, we only have one after all. I don't waste electricity, water or any other resources, and I drive as little as possible. I believe in a clean environment and renewable energy. But I also believe in economic reality. And I can smell a scam from a mile off.
First off some of you should look up the word weather and climate in the dictionary. Weather constantly changes, climate does not change on a daily basis it changes slowly over time. So to say that I believe climate changes all the time is a bit ignorant because it doesn't. Weather does.
And why is it that the climate scientists went to college to obtain degrees in science, just to perpetuate a scam? Why couldn't they rob a bank or work on wall street? Why are climate scientists, supposedly, part of this scam and not any other scientific organization? Hey, all those medical charities want money too! Must be a scam. I say that is a very weak justification for not believing in man made climate change. Hell, even Bush came around at the end...I suppose he is in bed with climate scientist too?
I do believe in warming caused by humans, but wanted to pinpoint the real disagreement. I also think that the scientific community doesn't understand the whole picture (yet) and they could change their mind once more in the future. One way or another, with almost 7 Billion humans this planet is overcrowded.
I see no FACTS that support the theory that HUMANS are a significant factor in climate change. Nor will reducing carbon emissions have any effect. The Carbonites can't explain why CO2 lags the temperature increase if CO2 is the cause of the warming. That is illogical.
And the no. 1 "greenhouse gas" is WATER VAPOR, and it IS a major factor.
Belief is not for science, but for religion - which is what is being peddled to the masses. The more you investigate the AGW / AGCC crowd, the more questionable are their findings and conclusions.
As to overcrowded, I do not concur.
But if you feel it is, do not let me prevent you from correcting the problem by killing off yourself and your progeny. Please do not seek to kill off others and their progeny to support your beliefs.
If we accept that the population doubling will continue every 50 years, then we should be planning ahead, for the 14 billion people due in 2060. And the 28 billion people due in 2110.
Instead of blathering about "climate change" we can do other more useful things.
Suggestions:
[] Consolidate population, improve human habitat
[] Expand arable land, reclaim lands lost to suburban sprawl
[] Transition to electric traction rail for land transportation (most efficient, and consumes less surface area per passenger / freight carried)
[] Increase efficiency, reduce power consumed per capita
First off, I believe in climate change but I was wondering, if you don't believe in it then what proof do you need to know it is real? I mean, is it simply because the idea of it is offensive to you? The other thing too I find curious is that most people that don't believe it are conservatives. But, as a conservative, shouldn't we conserve the world we live in from being destroyed by the hand of man? Teddy Roosevelt was a republican and he conserved our lands by doubling the number of national parks in our country. Doesn't conservatism also equate to conservationism??
Maybe it does exist. That doesn't mean that man caused it, he didn't. There were at least five ice ages and warmings in the history of the Earth before man was even on the planet. The pollution caused by man is a drop in the bucket compared to other causes of climate change, like solar flares and the internal temperature of the planet changing,
I think back to the late 70's when "the experts" predicted another ice age coming. Growing seasons would be much shorter, ice would clog ocean shipping lanes, etc. Now it is "global warming" or "climate change", etc. The earth goes through weather cycles for whatever reasons & there is little we can or should do about it. Leave it alone.
BTW, I remember catalytic converters when they first came out. Part of the appeal was that 1 of the inert "harmless gasses" coming out was carbon dioxide. Now carbon dioxide is called a "greenhouse gas".
I have largely abandoned the environmental camp since it has become so unrealistic & extreme.
I think back to the late 70's when "the experts" predicted another ice age coming. Growing seasons would be much shorter, ice would clog ocean shipping lanes, etc. Now it is "global warming" or "climate change", etc. The earth goes through weather cycles for whatever reasons & there is little we can or should do about it. Leave it alone.
BTW, I remember catalytic converters when they first came out. Part of the appeal was that 1 of the inert "harmless gasses" coming out was carbon dioxide. Now carbon dioxide is called a "greenhouse gas".
I have largely abandoned the environmental camp since it has become so unrealistic & extreme.
So, the question is, what proof do you need to believe it?
What is in question is man's ability to alter that, one iota...and his vanity in thinking he can.
400 years ago Iceland was mainly green pasture. Now it's mostly ice. This has exactly zero to do with carbon emissions and everything to do with natural climate change, which has been occuring since the beginning of time.
It's just become another money making opportunity. Buy this product, and you will be slowing climate change.
Yeah right.
If we really cared about the planet, we'd stop having babies and buying stuff.
So, the question is, what proof do you need to believe it?
I think it is largely a non issue. As I said, the planet seems to go through changes with weather. I think we have far more important things to worry about. We could spend billions of dollars to deal with "the problem" and get nowhere but poorer.
Let's start with this, I believe in anthropogenic climate change. But, what you asked, and what responses you received are two totally different things. Most of the posts here are written showing why they DON'T believe, not what evidence they NEED in order to believe.
For those who believe that humans couldn't possibly affect the earth, I will provide a simple common sense test to you. We know that the population of the earth in 1800 was approximately 1 billion, and by 2012 there were 7 billion, or a seven-fold increase. How can that NOT cause a change on the earth's surface and in the earth's atmosphere. Just because the earth will in some way survive the increase in population doesn't mean that it won't CHANGE the earth. Think of it this way, if you live in a house with 3 other people and take care of it responsibly, the house will always remain in great shape. If you increase the population in that house seven-fold and live in a house with 28 people in it, the house will soon show great wear and tear. Even if the people were to take care of the house carefully, 28 people taking showers will increase the water bill, 28 people using electronics will increase the electric bill, 28 people walking on the carpet and using the furniture will wear it out faster. The house will survive, but it will undergo change, and not for the better.
That man's carbon footprint has increased should not be doubted, but can it cause climate change? People seem to think that because the amount of CO2 produced by humans is much less than that which is produced naturally, then humans cannot be responsible for climate change. For those who believe this, I refer you to the saying about "the straw that broke the camel's back." No one would ever believe that a single straw could break the back of a camel, but the saying refers to a camel that was so overloaded with weight, that when a single straw was added to the existing weight, the camel's back broke. Human-produced CO2 is the straw that broke the camel's back.
The earth has the ability to absorb the CO2 that is produced naturally and even a little bit more. The extra amount that humans have been adding since the Industrial Revolution has exceeded the capacity of the earth to absorb. When that extra CO2 is a one-time event, like a volcanic eruption, the earth's atmosphere sees a spike in CO2 that is gradually absorbed over the next few years. When the extra CO2 is a yearly event, the earth's atmosphere never has a chance to recover, and the small yearly CO2 surplus accumulates, and the extra CO2 in the atmosphere grows exponentially.
For those who doubt the scientists, I say this: remember that scientific proof does not happen all at once. People once believed that the heavens revolved around the earth. When Copernicus proposed his heliocentric theory, the basic premise was right, but he got many aspects wrong. Copernicus' work was improved by Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, Bruno, and Newton. The same process is playing out with climate change scientists. They do not have all the answers now, but given time, the idea of anthropogenic climate change will become accepted, and future generations will look at the climate change detractors as the 21st century version of backers of the geocentric model
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
