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.
Alert: NASA’s James Hansen Declared Obama Has One Week Left To Save The Planet! — ‘On Jan. 17, 2009 Hansen declared Obama only ‘has four years to save Earth’ — Only 7 Days left!
UN official Mostafa Tolba, executive director of the UN Environment Program (UNEP), warned on May 11, 1982, the 'world faces an ecological disaster as final as nuclear war within a couple of decades unless governments act now.
As early as 1989, the UN was already trying to sell their “tipping point” rhetoric to the public. See: .: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.– Excerpt: According to July 5, 1989, article in the Miami Herald, the then-director of the New York office of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), Noel Brown, warned of a “10-year window of opportunity to solve” global warming. According to the 1989 article, “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.
UK’s Top Scientist Sir David King in 2004: ‘Antarctica is likely to be the world’s only habitable continent by the end of this century if global warming remains unchecked’
UK greenie George Monbiot 2002 warned we only had 10 years! ‘Famine can only be avoided if the rich give up meat, fish and dairy’– Monbiot on December 24, 2002: ‘Within as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world’s animals or it continues to feed the world’s people. It cannot do both’
MIT to Obama: Only 4 years left to stop global warming: ‘It is quite possible that if this is not done over the next four years, it will be too late’ — MIT to Obama: ‘We can no longer pretend that addressing climate change will be without real costs’ — ‘You have the power and the opportunity to lay the groundwork for a new clean-energy policy that will help us avoid the worst consequences of climate change,” said the letter, published in the MITTechnology Review’
All I hear is it's almost too late and afterwards, hurry it's at the point of no return.... Then years later, we are on the brink of disaster.... Each time, their solution is to give them more money.... Global warming religion trying to scare and guilt you into giving them your money...
No, then I'd have to teach you to count as well. I think it's best you just keep pathetically whining and crying about liberals because of your cowardice; stick with what you know.
Boy if this doesn't sound like old time RELIGION! "The rapture is just around the corner, sinners, REPENT NOW!!"
This is entirely the problem with AGW movement, the alarmism rings a bit hollow after awhile and nobody takes you seriously anymore.
Why do we continue to lend this crowd credibility after SO many of their past predictions were wrong?
The sad fact of the matter is that we SHOULD clean up the environment, we SHOULD conserve and we SHOULD look for cleaner forms of energy but now those worthy goals have been lumped together and contaminated with all of the shrill AGW alarmism and people aren't listening.
I submit that the AGW movement has HURT environmental causes more than they've helped them because they've taken the extreme route and cried wolf so many times that most of the public now associates environmental protection with the leftist alarmist loons that have anointed themselves as the champions of the movement.
We need a sensible environmental movement that is not based in socialism, alarmism and greed. The current one that we have has gaffed it up so many times in so many ways, that they don't deserve any more credibility or attention.
Meanwhile, one sad result of this constant alarmism is schoolchildren being taught "science" by their liberal activist teachers and worrying that they won't have a world to live in when they grow up.
why ISN'T reducing waste, finding renewable energy sources, and reducing chemical emissions in the air and water a good thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun
Because liberals.
I disagree. In my opinion, liberals and most environmentalists have done more damage to the cause of the environment than they've helped it.
With the constant alarmism and preaching the end of the world as we know it if we don't listen to them, most people have begun to tune out of anything that even smacks of environmentalism as a result.
Things like the asinine policy of taking ordinary lightbulbs and replacing them with toxic mercury bombs that have to have a room evacuated when they break. Then these bulbs are all made in China and shipped over on highly polluting container ships. Brilliant! We also know how much pride the Chinese put into safe manufacturing so I'm sure there is nothing to worry about
I'm not a big fan of the republican's track record on the issue either but it's your side that has made this your issue and anointed yourselves as the champions of it. Your side has also gaffed it up so badly that it's time no one should listen to you or lend you any more credibility on the matter.
Maybe we need bi-partisan or "non-partisan" environmental leadership and vision for a change!
That expanding sea ice just means cold air is swirling around more around the South Pole.
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.