Global Warming | Fact or Fiction?

[Trey of Diamonds]

Based on how you answered the poll, what do you think we should do about Global Warming?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Personally, I don't think Humanity is as much to blame for Global Warming as the natural cycle of the climate itself. Sure, we have an impact and possibly we have increased the speed at which the climate is warming but it would still change without our being here. A also think that working to reverse global warming has a great deal of dangerous consequences that shouldn't be overlooked. I'm not talking about recycling and conservation or trying to reduce pollution, those things should of course continue. But if you are considering trying to force an ecosystem to never change you will destroy it. Change is constant in nature.

I think more effort should be put towards studying what the world will be like as it changes and what those changes will mean to our society. If the southern parts of the world become desert and the northern tundra becomes farm land, you can expect a very different world. Canada and Siberia will become the bread baskets of the world. Americans will be sneaking across the Canadian boarder to help pick crops. Oh, the irony of it all.

 

[Revoltingest]

I need another option.
Global warming is happening, I care, but I'm an agnostic about the causes.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I need another option.
Global warming is happening, I care, but I'm an agnostic about the causes.

Fair enough, are you also agnostic about what to do about it? What do you think the out come will be? Raised shorelines with major flooding? No more artic ice? Vast deserts?

 

[Revoltingest]

Fair enough, are you also agnostic about what to do about it? What do you think the out come will be? Raised shorelines with major flooding? No more artic ice? Vast deserts?

Surprisingly, many of the solutions proposed for AGW are also just good policy:
- Cutting fossil fuel usage
- Preserving greenspace
- Limiting population
- Eating bacon (It helps us deal with the emotional stress.)

The primary problem I see in GW is that resources & assets will be redistributed by our uncaring planet.
Some countries will win, & others will lose big time. Political & economic turmoil will reign.
It would be good to mitigate & plan for this.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Surprisingly, many of the solutions proposed for AGW are also just good policy:
- Cutting fossil fuel usage
- Preserving greenspace
- Limiting population
- Eating bacon (It helps us deal with the emotional stress.)

The primary problem I see in GW is that resources & assets will be redistributed by our uncaring planet.
Some countries will win, & others will lose big time. Political & economic turmoil will reign.
It would be good to mitigate & plan for this.

My thoughts exactly! (Especially eating bacon. )

Care to guess which countries might come out on top after the redistribution?

 

[Revoltingest]

My thoughts exactly! (Especially eating bacon. )
Care to guess which countries might come out on top after the redistribution?

Russia & Canada stand to benefit from a warmer climate.
The Maldives will be no more.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Russia & Canada stand to benefit from a warmer climate.
The Maldives will be no more.

No more New Orleans either. We're looking at a completely different coast line. Do you think Russia and Canada are going to welcome the refugees from newly formed deserts or will the human races latest migration end in a major war over real estate?

 

[Revoltingest]

No more New Orleans either. We're looking at a completely different coast line. Do you think Russia and Canada are going to welcome the refugees from newly formed deserts or will the human races latest migration end in a major war over real estate?

There will be trouble.
I don't predict specifics.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

There will be trouble.
I don't predict specifics.

Chicken.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Global Warming is happening, but it's difficult to tell just how much is caused by us and how much is the earth's own natural cycle. Personally I think we should just abandon the whole idea of Global Warming and instead focus solely on doing away with our very limited fuels that we know for sure are very limited in quantity and toxic through their pollution and replacing them with sustainable energy that will be here tomorrow and won't leave the future generations dealing with polluted air.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Wow, a lot of people think humans are mostly to blame for Global Warming. Why is that? Is it not possible that the planet would be warming with or without us?

 

[waitasec]

it is possible...but pollution is our fault.
and pollution is causing a lot of health problems...
but then again we are subjected to the ways of nature and this may be her way to thin out the human population lest we destroy our host.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

it is possible...but pollution is our fault.
and pollution is causing a lot of health problems...
but then again we are subjected to the ways of nature and this may be her way to thin out the human population lest we destroy our host.

Destroying the host is not possible. Nothing that we can do will destroy all life on earth, we are nowhere near that powerful.

Pollution is our fault and it puts us at risk. The question in this thread is how much impact on Global Warming does pollution have? Does pollution cause Global Warming? Speed it up? Slow it down?

 

[waitasec]

Destroying the host is not possible. Nothing that we can do will destroy all life on earth, we are nowhere near that powerful.

you are right. but if we with our pollution make the earth uninhabitable for human life the host, as far as our perspective is concerned, has been destroyed.

Pollution is our fault and it puts us at risk. The question in this thread is how much impact on Global Warming does pollution have? Does pollution cause Global Warming? Speed it up? Slow it down?

don't know...

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

you are right. but if we with our pollution make the earth uninhabitable for human life the host, as far as our perspective is concerned, has been destroyed.

Nope, the parasite has been destroyed. The host lives on, quite happily in fact. If you insist on using the host/parasite analogy then you should use it correctly. When environmentalist talk of destroying the earth they are using propaganda techniques to exaggerate the issue and make it sound much worse than it really is. This is counter productive because those who recognise such techniques will stop listening, not caring whether the speaker is saying something important or not.

 

[waitasec]

Nope, the parasite has been destroyed. The host lives on, quite happily in fact. If you insist on using the host/parasite analogy then you should use it correctly. When environmentalist talk of destroying the earth they are using propaganda techniques to exaggerate the issue and make it sound much worse than it really is. This is counter productive because those who recognise such techniques will stop listening, not caring whether the speaker is saying something important or not.

but what good is the host if the parasite is gone?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

but what good is the host if the parasite is gone?

To the parasite, not much good at all. But I'm sure the host would be very happy to see the parasite gone. The relationship is not symbiotic where both parasite and host are interdependant on each other.

You attach a lot of importance to the human race to the planet's well being. But the opposite is true, we are very destructive to the planet's well being so eliminating us would be very helpful to it. Maybe its better that the Earth isn't sentient, we wouldn't win a war with her.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Fair enough, are you also agnostic about what to do about it? What do you think the out come will be? Raised shorelines with major flooding? No more artic ice? Vast deserts?

I have a different oppinion.

Sea Levels Are not rising except in the lies of the IPCC

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I have a different oppinion.

Sea Levels Are not rising except in the lies of the IPCC

Are you saying that there is no Global Warming at all? I think rising sea levels is grossly exaggerated but sea levels do change. I doubt the arctic melting would raise them much but Antarctica, that could cause some flooding. Of course it would also give us some real estate.