U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
View Poll Results: Do you believe scientists who say the Earth is warming because of greenhouse gases?
Yes 10 20.41%
No 34 69.39%
Not sure 5 10.20%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2010, 07:26 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
20,339 posts, read 13,833,043 times
Reputation: 5220

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
"Whatever happened to global warming?

Such weather doesn't seem to fit with warnings from scientists that the Earth is warming because of greenhouse gases. But experts say the cold snap doesn't disprove global warming at all — it's just a blip in the long-term heating trend.
"

Experts: Cold Snap Doesn't Disprove Global Warming - ABC News
What long term warming pattern? How long do they say it has been going on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2010, 10:38 PM
 
4,529 posts, read 4,850,612 times
Reputation: 730
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemycomputer90 View Post
Yes. We will become extinct if we do nothing. BTW, I hope you're staying warm down there in Tampa.

Nobody is arguing that we shouldn't clean the air. But the world community is going about this the wrong way. A plan like cap and trade will be economically harmful for both developed nations and developing nations.
C&T also doesn't really fix anything either.

It would probrably be cheaper in the long for for large companies to keep on pumping out the same crap, buy of credits from a smaller, less polluting company, and pass the expense onto the consumer.

Result? Same amount of garbage thrown into the environment, increased prices.

We addesssed acid rain back in the day with tough EPA laws. Those ahve been relaxed, or eliminated. We need to being them back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 11:15 PM
 
4,406 posts, read 5,455,893 times
Reputation: 2894
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemycomputer90 View Post
Yes. We will become extinct if we do nothing. BTW, I hope you're staying warm down there in Tampa.

Nobody is arguing that we shouldn't clean the air. But the world community is going about this the wrong way. A plan like cap and trade will be economically harmful for both developed nations and developing nations.
I don't understand the "[this] will be economically harmful" complaint here, from you and from others. It's like saying that cancer is expensive to treat, so don't bother. If we restrict the issues to the things that endanger our survival, what difference does the impact to the economy matter? Is the thinking that "the choice is between Earth and money, and by God, I'll pick money!"? I'm not saying that we should throw our money away, but if you're child is dying in the emergency room, are you going to worry about how much the doctor is going to cost?

We need to do what's right regardless of cost. That is the moral imperative in practically all matters where the planet is concerned. However, there must be resistance to any rush to draw conclusions from limited information. I believe the Earth is very much endangered by human activity because almost everything we do is imbalanced with respect to nature. I don't care to outline the exact effects, but my gut reaction and much of the science out there indicates we are no good for this planet.

I also can't understand the paranoia that permeates the anti-global warming crowd. They believe it's all a plot to extract our cash and destroy our country. Um, what do you think our recent wars did? It cost us trillions, we saw virtually no quantifiable benefit, but no one (at least no one on the right) ever seemed to raise their eyebrows that they, like the boogeyman of global warming, were just another way to extract our cash and destroy our country. Isn't the .0000001% of the world population that's "terrorist" kind of blown out of proportion?

I will stand on the side of the planet and the natural environment because we cannot exist without them. They are the only things that sustain us. All other considerations like the economy or patriotism (all manmade things by the way) are down on the list. But like all smart people, I won't yield these other things until the intent is proven to be lofty and verifiable. That's my two pennies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 11:19 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,891 posts, read 16,279,761 times
Reputation: 3123
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
"Whatever happened to global warming?

Such weather doesn't seem to fit with warnings from scientists that the Earth is warming because of greenhouse gases. But experts say the cold snap doesn't disprove global warming at all it's just a blip in the long-term heating trend."

Experts: Cold Snap Doesn't Disprove Global Warming - ABC News
Wow I thiought for sure that expert scientist Al Gore was going to make an announcement that he was wrong!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 12:00 AM
 
4,529 posts, read 4,850,612 times
Reputation: 730
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
I don't understand the "[this] will be economically harmful" complaint here, from you and from others. It's like saying that cancer is expensive to treat, so don't bother. If we restrict the issues to the things that endanger our survival, what difference does the impact to the economy matter? Is the thinking that "the choice is between Earth and money, and by God, I'll pick money!"? I'm not saying that we should throw our money away, but if you're child is dying in the emergency room, are you going to worry about how much the doctor is going to cost?

We need to do what's right regardless of cost. That is the moral imperative in practically all matters where the planet is concerned. However, there must be resistance to any rush to draw conclusions from limited information. I believe the Earth is very much endangered by human activity because almost everything we do is imbalanced with respect to nature. I don't care to outline the exact effects, but my gut reaction and much of the science out there indicates we are no good for this planet.

I also can't understand the paranoia that permeates the anti-global warming crowd. They believe it's all a plot to extract our cash and destroy our country. Um, what do you think our recent wars did? It cost us trillions, we saw virtually no quantifiable benefit, but no one (at least no one on the right) ever seemed to raise their eyebrows that they, like the boogeyman of global warming, were just another way to extract our cash and destroy our country. Isn't the .0000001% of the world population that's "terrorist" kind of blown out of proportion?

I will stand on the side of the planet and the natural environment because we cannot exist without them. They are the only things that sustain us. All other considerations like the economy or patriotism (all manmade things by the way) are down on the list. But like all smart people, I won't yield these other things until the intent is proven to be lofty and verifiable. That's my two pennies.
Would you give a cancer patient a stick of chewing gum to combat that cancer?

NO, you address the cacner directly.

C&T is the stick of chewing gum where the environment is concerned.

The EPA laws of the '70's and 80's worked. There was no C&T involved. They were allowed to falter and fail, especially by the last administration.

Want to do something for the environment that actually will work? C&T ain't it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 03:53 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 21,004,271 times
Reputation: 8620
I'm a little different from most people on this issue.

I understand that one cold winter, does not break the theory of Global Warming.

I understand that "Global Warming" is a misleading statement. Most people think "Hot" when you say Warming, thats not the case at all. What it does mean, are bigger swings in the weather. Hotter in the summers, colder in the winters, wetter in some areas, drier in others.

Now, do I think we should destroy our economy to fix Global Warming? No. For one, is it really true? The Theory behind it is sound, but its not 100%. After all, climate scientists have been wrong many times before. Much of the natural phenomena that we see that leads us to think Global Warming is real, could just be a natural swing in the environment.

And, if it is true, can we do anything about it? If the United States cut its carbon emissions in half tomorrow, it would put a dent in the problem, but we'd be far from ending it. Are we going to go to war to prevent other countries from polluting the atmosphere with CO2? Many scientists will tell you they believe we are to late, and Global Warming has already set in. So, why destroy the economy to fix the unfixable?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for future development of alternative energy. I believe that the less we can touch the Earth, the better. I've said many times I support a Manhattan Project for an alternative energy source, to get us off of foreign sources of energy. Thats more economic then it is "Green" for me though.

I know something is happening to our environment. My Grandparents will flat out tell you, that on average, the winters are milder now. I can remember growing up with feet of snow in West Tennessee. By the time I left home, we were lucky to see a dusting of snow once a year. Ask around, if you aren't talking about Global Warming, most people will tell you that their environment is different now. We all see it, we just ignore it because its not something that happened quickly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 04:26 AM
 
2,173 posts, read 2,520,925 times
Reputation: 880
Global cooling proves global warming dammit!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 04:51 AM
 
3,704 posts, read 4,261,796 times
Reputation: 2234
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
Let me think this thru....
If the scientists are wrong:
We could do what they say - spend money, clean up our air, develop new industries
We could do nothing - (the usual result of doing nothing)
If the scientists are right:
We could do what they say - spend money, clean up our air, develop new industries and survive
We could do nothing - become extinct, which I am sure the cockroachs wouldn't mind
This looks like a secular version of Pascal's Wage.

If you don't believe in God and you are right; you lose nothing.
If you don't believe in God and you are wrong; you go to Hell.
If you believe in God and you are wrong; you lose nothing.
If you believe in God and you are right; you go to Heaven.

So the best bet is that you believe in God.
_______________________________________________

Now, the problem is that it is not really that simple to merely "clean the air" and "develop new industries". In fact, trying to push technology before it has fully developed is likely to waste both money and natural resources. Ever hear of some of those military programs that have been going on for more than 15 years, have cost billions of dollars, and is still not much closer to building a practical prototype than when they started? Star Wars, the V-22, guided 155mm shells, and Land Warrior come to mind. Well, it doesn't just work for the military. In fact, the reason why the military gets away with it is because they play the whole "we provide tens of thousands of jobs" and "if we don't don't spend the GDP of some nations on a program that has barely advanced since the Reagan years, we'll be doomed" cards. Well, if we treat Global Warming as the absolute existential threat that so many activists (and some scientists) want it to be, we'll just end up with the Green version the nuclear powered plane.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 05:50 AM
 
27,903 posts, read 34,356,310 times
Reputation: 4031
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
Let me think this thru....
If the scientists are wrong:
We could do what they say - spend money, clean up our air, develop new industries
We could do nothing - (the usual result of doing nothing)
If the scientists are right:
We could do what they say - spend money, clean up our air, develop new industries and survive
We could do nothing - become extinct, which I am sure the cockroachs wouldn't mind
The estimates of what cap and trade will do to our economy are close to $40 trillion over this whole century. The estimates of how it'll change our climate, assuming we can even control it, only changes the outcome by <1C.

You forgot in your estimate that we could do what "they" say, coupled with everything else that is going on with our national debt, and we could go bankrupt because we already lose, even faster, the small edge we currently have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 10:18 AM
 
4,406 posts, read 5,455,893 times
Reputation: 2894
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
C&T is the stick of chewing gum where the environment is concerned.

The EPA laws of the '70's and 80's worked. There was no C&T involved. They were allowed to falter and fail, especially by the last administration.
I need to gain more information about C&T but I take exception to your statement about the last administration. They let the biggest polluters police themselves. I liken their strategy to chewing gum as well. They didn't give a crap about the environment, they only wanted these (mostly energy) companies to do whatever they wanted.

I personally don't care one whit whether environmental regulation destroys a company's bottom line. Clean air and water trump employment and dividends.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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