Question for those on either side of the global warming debate?

[Brianna's Mommy]

Why do those who don't believe in global warming seem to be against measures that will help to reduce pollution?

I mean, there is very strong scientific and non-scientific evidence that indicates that the planet is not as nice of a place as it was 100 years ago. There is a garbage barge the size of Texas in the ocean, more and more major cities are running out of room for garbage, many major cities have smog warnings, incidents of asthma are on the rise, especially in major cities, and non-renewable resources are just that...non-renewable. That would indicate to any intelligent person that they will eventually run out, and we will need an alternate means of producing energy. So, even if you don't believe in global warming, isn't it obvious that we need to reduce consumption and pollution if we want to have the same type of lifestyle that we have grown accustomed to?

 

[Ben O]

I don't think there is anyone in favour of pollution or wasting energy. These things have nothing to do with whether or not people believe human activity is changing the climate.

 

[Ottawa Mike]

I don't believe in man-made global warming yet I am all for catalytic converters, commuter lanes on highways, using public transportation, riding a bicycle, etc.

I like the progress towards hybrid cars, full electric cars and eventually hydrogen cars. Let's phase out coal-based electricity and replace it with mircohydro projects and thorium nuclear power. As far as wind power and solar power, they may be alright for local use but they are not a cheap enough or powerful enough source to power on a large scale.

You see, we have the same goals. I just want to progress is such a way that we don't whack our economy and way of living by using a swinging hammer approach for no good reason.

 

[Cory]

Greed Greedy Very Greedy they feel the world is for the taking. Win at any cost. Some delude themselves by saying once I make it I'll change . But if you get enough cattle running in one direction a cliff is enivatible. No matter how smart they are group think is more powerfull than anything on earth. But all you have to do is be smart and study your facts and stand up to them. Unfortunatley we are them so first step look in the mirror, then move on to everybody else. And remember Green is a fad and fads fade. Conservation is a way of life.

 

[Tay]

Who says we are against measures that will help reduce pollution?
We are against having "Cap n Trade" legislation forced on us because of a lie, legislation that will leave millions destitute. Legislation that will make Al Gore rich.
I want change as much as the next person but does the end justify the means? Trying to force change on people based on lies when we have no idea if it will make a lick of difference is absurd.
Actually it will make a difference, to peoples wallets!

 

[Starbuck]

Your premise is entirely incorrect. Just because we disbelieve in a false science of AGW doesn't mean we advocate pollution. I have been an environmentalist all my life and even today am helping China set up a recycling program for plastic. I have investigated many environmental pollution and toxicity issues of compounds. What have you done?

I do not believe in the hoax of AGW. I do believe that you are being duped into this religion that is just not true.

 

[pegminer]

Even though they claim to be environmentally friendly, virtually of the global warming deniers that responded to you believe in essentially unlimited population growth, their reasoning being that the Earth could sustain a much higher population than it currently does. So what? It doesn't mean that we should live that way. Clearly quality of life is better with a smaller human population, which is certainly the biggest driver to environmental problems.

 

[GetaBrain]

There is a lot more we could be doing as far as recycling goes. As far as global warming...

There isn't actually a scientific debate. Scientists are pretty much universally in agreement that it's happening, and the effects have the potential to be very far-reaching. Of course, there are people who don't "believe" in global warming, but they either have no understanding of science, or are completely ignorant of our current knowledge on the subject (or both). The only "debate" (if you can call it that) regarding climate change is between scientists and idiots. I know which side I'm going to go with.

 

[eric c]

Have you heard of carbon credits? The other side to it is carbon offsets. How is paying money to people in third world countries to plant trees going to help the smog problem in major cities? Do you know that many poor farmers are getting kicked off their land with little compensation so the government can plant trees and collect money to fight "global warming"? Governments are giving money to find technologies so carbon can be sequestered in the earth. None of these measures will help improve air quality in your local city. In the meantime there are other areas that the needs attention and the government has no more money left.

Do you know that one of the measures to fight global warming is using bio fuels. The result of which is a sharp rise in food prices and food riots in third world countries that could not afford these higher prices.

But if goes deeper than that. Are you saying that any group that believes that their ideology is the best, all they have to do is scare people in believing their cause, we should support it because it is good for us anyway? What happened to democracy? That is not the way it works. If you believe that energy efficiency is good for us, promote it on its own merits.