posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 07:46 PM
From experience and the liberal media, I came to my personal conclusion that global warming really is becoming more of a religion than a concept
involving science. The scientific aspects of global warming are seemingly exaggerated, but yet we have to do something for the future generations.
However, there are always a group or very large society of individuals that treats global warming as if it is a religion. These people are always
knocking on one's doors trying to make one support some of their petitions or forcing one to change every element of his/her life; think about it, it
is similar to missionaries.
I've been wondering is global warming is advocated by the U.S government to save oil and resources so that it will out live other nations. The
concept could be similar to that of the state using the church as a way to create conformity amongst the general or rather feeble-minded population.
The extreme activists treat global warming as something that they can be proud of, everytime they hear the two words they probably feel a sense
of passion and "piety". It's relatively similar to a Jihad, people lose their minds in erratic ideas which they claim to be the absolutely
I do believe in global warming, however, I do not and probably will not feel like a part of a solution unless I treat global warming as a
religion. Something that can be corrupted, exploited, and eventually dangerous to society. Think about it, the company that create solar panels or
energy-star products places outrageously high price tags. They do no care about global warming, they administer it to the general population for a
reasonable profit and they are doing a fine dandy job, just like the indulgences in the old times.
Most of the literate world today regards "global warming'' as both real and dangerous. Indeed, the diplomatic activity concerning warming might
lead one to believe that it is the major crisis confronting mankind. The June 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, focused on international
agreements to deal with that threat, and the heads of state from dozens of countries attended. I must state at the outset, that, as a scientist, I can
find no substantive basis for the warming scenarios being popularly described. Moreover, according to many studies I have read by economists,
agronomists, and hydrologists, there would be little difficulty adapting to such warming if it were to occur. Such was also the conclusion of the
recent National Research Council's report on adapting to global change. Many aspects of the catastrophic scenario have already been largely
discounted by the scientific community. For example, fears of massive sea-level increases accompanied many of the early discussions of global warming,
but those estimates have been steadily reduced by orders of magnitude, and now it is widely agreed that even the potential contribution of warming to
sea-level rise would be swamped by other more important factors.
Replaced 'quote' with 'ex' tags
Please read Posting work written by others
[edit on 18/12/07 by masqua]