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.
What Global Warming? I don't see any Global Warming? Besides, man is far too small an influence on the weather to affect the weather. See the big ball in the sky that is so bright that you can't look at it. Its called the sun. Notice how it warms up the day, and when it goes down it gets cooler. It fluctuates in the amount of energy it puts out, affecting the weather and climate here on earth, far more than us puny people.
Go to California to see some global warming. Go up to the arctic tundra and see where melting permafrost has created bogs releasing methane gas in some places, and earth collapsed into sinkholes full of water/melted ice, in others. Peer over the edge of the Asian continent, and watch the ocean bubble with methane escaping from the floor. Just because you can't see it from wherever you are, doesn't mean it's not happening, and that you're not going to cook before you live out your lifetime.
So, let me make sure I have this right. The earth goes through natural cycles of warming and cooling. Agreed. Man has no impact on that normal cycle. Sorry, have to disagree. If the burning of fossil fuels was a good thing for the environment, then my challenge is to start your car and sit in the garage with it. What? You wouldn't do that because it would kill you. Then why do we think that millions of cars, factories and power plants pumping an exponential amount of that poison, yes, poison into the atmosphere has no effect on anything?
And what if the net effect of global warming is actually global cooling. The polar caps melt, releasing billions or trillions of gallons of fresh water into the oceans which has the effect of desalination. Which leads to the oceans not only rising but also freezing further south than what we think of as normal.
Of course we have an effect, but do we have the overruling effect?
If anything, we should curb pollution for ourselves and our own well-being.
Global warming would increase the amount of land we have for producing food.
Cycles have gone on for billions of years and will continue.
The earth will happily exist with or without us.
But that's not an excuse to be wasteful and polluting.
Nothing wrong with global warming at all. Unless you live on a coastal plain. Oops. There goes the East Coast, Florida, and the Gulf Coast. Look out Kansas...a third of the United States is disappearing. Here we come!
Nothing wrong with global warming at all. Unless you live on a coastal plain. Oops. There goes the East Coast, Florida, and the Gulf Coast. Look out Kansas...a third of the United States is disappearing. Here we come!
The city of Miami Beach already is underwater. People's yards have turned into standing pools with fish in them. The fish get in from underneath, from channels in the limestone. They've raised the street levels there, but during storms, everything's sloshing, anyway.
I'd agree that our first concern should be centered on pollution, secondly, we know that our technology has produced some unpleasant side effects, and thirdly, warming, cooling--- it doesn't really matter what we think may happen, but it certainly does matter that we attempt to ameliorate the causes of our immediate discomfort and disease.
Pollution does have an impact upon the human environment, so if we want to utilize our natural intuitive defenses then we'll first need to agree on some elemental stuff surrounding all that which makes us ill or impacts our ability to produce agriculturally at a sustainable level, and that will automatically include a view of pollution as something to combat.
I personally think the politicization of issues serves to render them to the severe polarity we suffer, and that in turn renders them to the scrap heap of political indifference that usually follows any prolonged vitriolic debate. Those in government that want to protect their supporters who are also the biggest polluters should be ran out of office and replaced with those who seek to work for a common good rather than serving their own private constituency.
The city of Miami Beach already is underwater. People's yards have turned into standing pools with fish in them. The fish get in from underneath, from channels in the limestone. They've raised the street levels there, but during storms, everything's sloshing, anyway.
Happening in some neighborhoods in Bangkok where I lived for a couple of years.
So just bear with me here for a minute. The Earth long ago was warmer, and supported an abundance of life that lived in tropical climates. It is in the tropical climates today that we find the greatest diversity, and abundance of life. The oil that we have today was caused by the accumulation of biomass that settled and turned to fossil fuels. This resulted in a significant amount of "carbon energy" that left the surface, and the Earth itself has cooled. Now that we are extracting the fossil fuels and burning them we are in effect re-releasing this carbon energy back into the surface environment, and this is warming the Earth, in effect, back to a tropical environment. Is that all that bad really?
There are winners and losers in any climate change. If you live in, say, Norway or Canada, then you may view global warming as a good thing.
But Florida would disappear entirely, so where would YOU move? You can't move in with me. Likewise most of Louisiana would be underwater, along with the very heavily populated east coastal plain of the USA. One of the USA's biggest food-producing areas, the Central Valley in California, would become an inland sea. In fact, many of the most heavily populated areas on all continents are coastal and would disappear (New York City, Memphis, Miami, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Cairo, London, Shang Hai, Hong Kong, Sydney, Buenos Aires, all Pacific islands...). Where would those people go?
Large chunks of the planet are already uncomfortably hot for human habitation (equators), and they'd get even hotter. Most of Africa, South America, and southern Asia would be uninhabitable because of the heat. All those people would have to move north or south, to places like Canada or Norway... so maybe the current residents of those locations wouldn't have it as good as originally thought.
Global warming can be extremely bad but, that the issue of global warming is so steeped in politics and agendas from both sides, is much worse.
That's because there are powerful vested interests involved in ignoring the problem and hoping it goes away,, and they've spent a bundle at creating a propaganda machine to convince the US public that the whole thing is not their fault, i.e. not the fault of the oil and auto industries, and others.
In the end it won't matter, because we're all going up in toast together, us and the corporations and their CEO's.
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.
