U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2016, 09:44 PM
 
Location: Nesconset, NY
2,203 posts, read 3,466,606 times
Reputation: 2120

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by yofie View Post
Let me expand my question: Are there environmental groups that hardly even mention climate change or global warming and that focus exclusively on any one of the other environmental issues?
Yes, of course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2016, 09:44 PM
 
Location: Central Illinois -
21,363 posts, read 14,269,446 times
Reputation: 14496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back to NE View Post
You're clearly cherry-picking to achieve an agenda, perhaps for a term paper or thesis.
No question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2016, 09:51 PM
 
Location: Fort Collins, USA
1,448 posts, read 2,355,378 times
Reputation: 1775
There are environmental groups that are opposed to the big solar and wind farm development push on public lands. They are concerned with protecting habitat and species and think that there is a panic about climate change that is leading other environmental groups to support any and all solar and wind projects. I think they have a point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 04:42 AM
 
Location: Backwoods of Maine
7,098 posts, read 8,107,282 times
Reputation: 18713
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back to NE View Post
If we don't do better, by 2100, half the world could be uninhabitable.
Way more than half the world is uninhabitaable NOW....always has been, always will be. And that has nothing to do with "global warming", "climate change", or the presence of piddly humans on the planet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 07:28 AM
 
Location: Divided Tribes of America
13,539 posts, read 5,459,430 times
Reputation: 5295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nor'Eastah View Post
Way more than half the world is uninhabitaable NOW....always has been, always will be. And that has nothing to do with "global warming", "climate change", or the presence of piddly humans on the planet.
True, but there aren't people already living there. So it's not really a problem.

Making the parts of the planet between 40N and 40S uninhabitable, on the other hand, certainly IS a big problem. Lots of people live there and are already struggling with poor food and water supplies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Out West
22,576 posts, read 16,717,234 times
Reputation: 26128
Quote:
Originally Posted by yofie View Post
Seems to me that these days, the environmental movement in general toes the line of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) in terms of a scientific consensus pointing to dangerous anthropogenic climate change due mainly to greenhouse gas emissions. It also seems to me that climate change is the number one or at least number two issue of the environmental movement these days. All this was less the case as recently as the 1990s, let alone the 1980s and beforehand.

My question is: In this day and age, are there environmental groups that think green in terms of the other issues (e.g. endangered species, noxious air/water/soil pollution) but that are skeptical that climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous for the planet? In other words, are there environmental groups that value issues such as endangered species or the Pacific garbage bowl but that agree more with the Heartland Institute when it comes to climate change (i.e. that it's mainly natural, has always occurred in Earth's history, and that it's not more dangerous than in the geological past)?
I've had Republicans who know me well call me a tree hugging hippie because I do care about the environment very much. I do care about endangered species very much. I do believe that humans have destroyed so much - and it sickens me. I do not, however, believe in this bs of man made "catastrophic" global warming. Climates change. That's what they do. It's been happening since the earth has been around. Humans have absolutely had a hand in tearing things up on this planet, and making this planet worse, but humans do not have the power to completely destroy this planet. They can, and most certainly will, destroy themselves. The earth will rebound.

I'm not a group, and I know of no group who thinks like that. I know of some individuals who think like I do - we care about keeping things clean. No litter, no toxins being belched out in to the air by factories, more environmentally friendly substances being used to create things...but we also don't believe in all of this government regulation. I believe that if a company had a factory that belched toxins in to the air on a regular basis, and people became aware of it, the company would eventually go out of business for the simple fact that the majority would stop supporting that company. We will never know, of course, because liberals never want to allow the free market to work.

So there's some individuals out there that would be considered "environmentalists" (and no I didn't even begin to touch on everything that I do and want done), who do not believe in AGW, but we aren't a collective group. Those groups, that I actually gave money to when I was younger and naive, spend more money on raising money than they do actually doing a thing for the environment. I no longer give them any money. I believe they are more about making money (non profit is a laugh) and ordering people what to do than they are about actually doing anything positive for the environment. They make real environmentalists look bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 01:53 PM
 
21 posts, read 8,513 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
I've had Republicans who know me well call me a tree hugging hippie because I do care about the environment very much. I do care about endangered species very much. I do believe that humans have destroyed so much - and it sickens me. I do not, however, believe in this bs of man made "catastrophic" global warming. Climates change. That's what they do. It's been happening since the earth has been around. Humans have absolutely had a hand in tearing things up on this planet, and making this planet worse, but humans do not have the power to completely destroy this planet. They can, and most certainly will, destroy themselves. The earth will rebound.

I'm not a group, and I know of no group who thinks like that. I know of some individuals who think like I do - we care about keeping things clean. No litter, no toxins being belched out in to the air by factories, more environmentally friendly substances being used to create things...but we also don't believe in all of this government regulation. I believe that if a company had a factory that belched toxins in to the air on a regular basis, and people became aware of it, the company would eventually go out of business for the simple fact that the majority would stop supporting that company. We will never know, of course, because liberals never want to allow the free market to work.

So there's some individuals out there that would be considered "environmentalists" (and no I didn't even begin to touch on everything that I do and want done), who do not believe in AGW, but we aren't a collective group. Those groups, that I actually gave money to when I was younger and naive, spend more money on raising money than they do actually doing a thing for the environment. I no longer give them any money. I believe they are more about making money (non profit is a laugh) and ordering people what to do than they are about actually doing anything positive for the environment. They make real environmentalists look bad.
This is what I call the arrogance of man. You know, the man that plows up every acre of habitat to grow corn, to make fuel for cars. Instead of food for people or the man who willingly, happily takes productive ground out out of production to put up a solar farm. The man who thinks he can destroy the planet..... pure arrogance....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 03:10 PM
 
Location: DC
6,509 posts, read 6,427,712 times
Reputation: 3112
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeadoubleDD View Post
This is what I call the arrogance of man. You know, the man that plows up every acre of habitat to grow corn, to make fuel for cars. Instead of food for people or the man who willingly, happily takes productive ground out out of production to put up a solar farm. The man who thinks he can destroy the planet..... pure arrogance....
The arrogance is in thinking that man can't affect the environment. Look at the rivers, look at the extinct species due to man. Look at the recovery of the bald eagle after we reformed our practices. We are changing the climate and aspects of that change will not be to our liking. Time to stop being stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Divided Tribes of America
13,539 posts, read 5,459,430 times
Reputation: 5295
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeadoubleDD View Post
This is what I call the arrogance of man. You know, the man that plows up every acre of habitat to grow corn, to make fuel for cars. Instead of food for people or the man who willingly, happily takes productive ground out out of production to put up a solar farm. The man who thinks he can destroy the planet..... pure arrogance....
Nobody is claiming that humans can completely destroy the planet or destroy all life.

Nonetheles, it's probably not a good idea to raise the planet's temperature to the point where a large part of it becomes uninhabitable by human civilization, especially when the population is forecast to hit 9 billion this century.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2016, 09:43 AM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
2,769 posts, read 1,035,829 times
Reputation: 5940
Yofie, this forum is mainly inhabited by the partially educated, liberal types who think they know it all and have already made up their minds. Facts can be ignored once their minds have been made up.

Ask them why every single prediction made in the late 80s/early 90s by the Warming Crowd has turned up wrong these 30 yrs later. A theory is only as good as its ability to predict. How good is their theory?

In religion, a mind set is determined and then proof is sought selectively. In science, every conclusion is viewed with skepticism and further testing is demanded. It's never settled in science, by definition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:40 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top