Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-01-2009, 07:35 PM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,027,148 times
Reputation: 15645

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatchance2005 View Post
I don't care two cents about Al Gore. I consider him an annoying opportunist. I also don't understand the Rightwing extremists homoerotic fixation on him.

Global warming derives from three important indisputable discoveries made in 1824, 1859, and 1888. It was generally accepted but not really considered proven until the development of radar during WWII. It was taught in schools when I was in school (1960's), and when my Dad was in school (1930's).

The only change I have seen in my lifetime is the accelleration of the timeline, in that everything that has been predicted is occurring or has occurred, only decades or Centuries sooner than predicted. I'd attribute that to two things, mainly. One is I think there was a tacit assumption that we'd do what we could about the problems we had caused that were likely to kill us. Global warming was about third on the list at that time (1960's). Second, there were many factors that we hadn't considered, because we didn't know about them. Examples would be that melting glacial or polar ice would float on a layer of water and move to the sea far faster than the "glacial" pace we'd reckoned on, or that the thawing of the permafrost would lead to massive outgassing of methane from organic material previously frozen for thousands of years. Other factors...no one knew the pace with which industrialization would spread throughout the world, which turned out to be quite fast after 1970. No one could have predicted the suspension of enforcement of the anti-pollution laws passed in the 1970's that occurred in 2000. And of course (probably quite foolishly) no one expected a political movement to develop that would attempt to block action and spread the hoax/conspiracy theory disinformation.

I don't know what you mean by this. Please explain
Generally when the subjet of global warming is raised the first thing that comes up is how the U.S. is primarily responsible but man in general is the culprit.
I am on the side of weather cycles that man doesn't control, nor do I go for man being responsible for warming (still an open subject) and not much we're gonna do will stop the weather from cycling.
Do I want clean air? You bet! It's not good for us to breath toxic stuff but carbon credits, no freon etc will and have done nothing to change anything but the amount of money some people make.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top