Global Warming Claims...?

  • Thread starter Thread starter susan ?
  • Start date Start date
S

susan ?

Guest
I'm doing a writing assignment that is to write a speech on any particular subject, & i decided to do global warming.

what kind of claims do you think i should put,
where i can back it up with arguments & evidence for the arguments?

**not the claim that global warming is here, or it is dangerous.
 
There are two sides to this argument. Accept or deny.

You can do research through the IPCC and other scientific organizations, or you can look at the Exxon Mobile funded anti-global warming retoric, or the crap coming from the EPA during the Bush white house.

Quote from the ezine article:
"It seems that the most common recurring factor about the argument against the evidence of global warming is that these arguments are concocted and disseminated by industries that depend on the production and sale of elements that cause global warming. It is also a recurring theme that many of these industrialists have established long and intimate relationships with politicians who help their cause and receive huge financial campaign contributions in returns. In the case of American politics, environment has traditionally been a liberal cause that the Democratic Party fights for. So instead of being treated as a bipartisan issue of much importance, the right-wing media has relentlessly worked to try and disprove the existence of global warming, a movement led by radio personalities such as Rush Limbaugh, who has also long battled prescription drug addiction.
 
Ask Ourselves These EnviroMENTAL Questions

How long has this climate crisis being going on for?
Describe this crisis in detail (no googling).
How has this crisis in climate affected ourselves or someone we know personally?
Who was Rachel Carson?
Do we all have chocking fits when breathing the air?
Why are we living longer now than at any time in human history?
Should we miss living in smoke filled mud huts, fighting for the water hole and using peat moss for toilet paper?
What is the difference between sustainability and poverty?
Since La Nina delayed global warming, why is La Nina not considered stronger than all of the magical forces of global warming itself?
What would have to happen to prove the theory was wrong after all?
The theory started in 1986 and the IPCC has been making predictions of climate crisis for 19 years, so how much longer is the world’s longest emergency going to go on for?
How is the IPCC’s “precaution” or “we better do something just in case” worthy of being called an “exact” science, let alone consensus?
Why do we bow to scientists after they infected our planet with their evil chemicals and are being bought out by evil oil companies to kill clean technology?
Calling a paid consultant a scientist is not illegal we can assume?
Why isn’t there a shortage of Oxygen from all of this evil combustion?
Should we ban or just tax volcanoes?
When so-called scientists, hysterical corporate media, PR firms and pandering politicians all agree on one issue, should we be obedient or suspect?
How did the earth get to be 5 billion years old and not survive the effects of human monkeys?
Can the taxes we give politicians to lower the temperature of the planet make the grass greener and the sky bluer too?
Is the Tooth ferry real?
Do we enjoy threatening our children by denying them a future with their own grand kids and making everyone around us as miserable, frail, sensitive, frightened and hysterical as we are with this aging CO2 theory?
Describe the state of our environment without the CO2 threat?
Why do we always have to be motivated by crisis and not reason?
Will global warming be remembered in history along with Bush’s WMD neocon scam and witch burning?
Why are these predictors of doom not standing on street corners with signs that say what the dogma adds up to: THE END IS NEAR.
Are we in the least bit optimistic that this Armageddon prediction will be wrong after all?
If it takes consensus to prove the theory wrong, how can only simple consensus prove it right?
Would we be willing to work together to find a way to avoid war-causing oil and protect our environment instead of trying to rescue and tax our way out of a crisis that clearly does not exist?
 
The correct claim is that there is no relationship between co2 and temperatures. Co2 levels have increased at a steady rate while temperatures have remained constant over the last 12 years.

No one can predict the future, and to use science to make the claim that it's possible is just fraudulent. No one knows if it will be warmer or colder in the future. Anyone that states otherwise is just guessing.
 
Back
Top