It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Wanted: Top Anti-Global Warming Arguments Debunked

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 11:47 AM

Originally posted by budski

And besides - it's now called Climate Change in order that it can cover a multitude of scenario's.

For those who are not sure Climate Change = Weather

So we've all got to be scared of the weather.

This really gets my goat, because it detracts from real environmental issues like pollution and deforestation - the things we SHOULD be doing something about.

I am not trying to split hairs here, or be combative, or even a pain in your ass man, I assure you.

While I can understand the above statement, something that I often notice with human behavior is the need for repercussions before people change the way they operate.

Now I am not saying that climate change is not being effected by humans, but I am also not saying it is. What I AM trying to say is that the concept is an extreamly useful device for acheiving the goals you mention above:
"pollution and deforestation" and I am sure we can both agree that there are more issues that need our attention, like habitat fragmentation, species diversity, etc, etc...

This is just a thought. What ever its merit I thought it was worth pointing out. Based on the state of the world today humans really do need to begin to make changes and there is a LOT of resistance to doing this. It seems to me that using a device such as the 'enemy' or 'threat' is a great way to motivate people to change.

Now this raises many other issues such as how this device is used, if the device is real or created, the legitimacy of manipulating ht public, etc...

This is off the top of my head as I sit here and drink my morning tea so forgive me if it is a bit far fetched or even dense.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 11:57 AM
reply to post by Animal

A very valid point, but these things have been pushed to one side as far as education about them goes, and the focus has been shifted to CO2 - which is bunk IMO.

Yes we need to stop polluting, and chopping down hundreds of acres of trees etc, and more importantly we need to educate people about the dangers of what we are doing, but instead we are subjected to constant fearmongering by gore and his acolytes who would have us believe that everything is the fault of man.

It's not - we only like to think it is because we have an overblown sense of our importance to the planet.

I've also yet to see anyone address the methane issue - created by termites and bovine species, amongst others - it's a far more dangerous greenhouse gas than the CO2 they blame everything on.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:06 PM
reply to post by budski

You make good points. First off I am totally with you on the methane. I do not know anything about termites, but I do know that our cattle / livestock situation is causing a LOT of problems both atmospheric and in terms of ground and water contamination.

Al Gore's 15 minutes are over IMHO. I am probably his prime target audience based on my progressive ideals and green leanings but I only think about him when people who can't stand him bring him up. Not to dismiss your point only to shed some light on his diminishing 'power'.

The focus on C02 needs to be broken and we need to diversify our stance, that is for sure. This is one place I can agree with those who do not buy into Climate Change. True solutions are NEVER so simple as this, focusing on ONE cause and dismissing all the rest.

This is something I will need to think about, because I am not quite sure how to get the message out to the general public.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:18 PM
reply to post by Animal

People will get bored reading this, but I always feel I have to point out that I am a long standing member of greenpeace - the reason I hold the views I do on CO2 and AGW is that they are a load of politically driven rubbish, designed to enrich the few and imprison the many - hence the IPCC, the intergovernmental panel on climate change.

When the governments start spending more of the green taxes on worthwhile projects, then I MIGHT start believing they have the planets (or our) best interests in mind.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:25 PM
reply to post by budski

This is a very good point and probably the most damming to the 'green' movement within government.

The one good thing I will always say in regards to Jimmy Carter was his investment in and support of alternative energy technology and his attempts to deal with dependence on oil.

We need some real leaders in government to step up and take action, I see sadly little to none being done by our representatives.

Even folks like Kucinich who I love so much are too busy focusing on other things to stand up for this issue. It is not to say he is no good, it is just to reiterate your point, the government is not doing jack and it reeks of corruption.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 03:39 AM
One thing I have always wondered about this debate is why people so vigorously oppose the idea of global warming. What is the pyschology behind someone that has no experience within the topic (pro or con) stating absolutes like they are experts. I personally take the opinion of a peer reviewed scientist with a PHD much more than a secret lobbying firm who argues on the behalf of the Corporations that are at risk of financial gain/loss. Assuming it is all a lie, what is wrong with taking care of the planet you have the privelage to live on?

Regardless of whether our actions cause climate change, it is undeniable that our actions cause global change with regards to the ecosystem. Does the opposition hate earth and her animals and plants so much that they want to pollute as much as possible?

Does anyone really think that pumping poisons into the atmosphere is good? Are people so small minded to really think we cannot affect our planet? We can wipe animals off this earth in decades, God takes longer to make something go extinct.

The unfortunate thing is that if the global warming believers are wrong, we are out a few bucks and life goes on. If the disbelievers are wrong, the future generations will pay the price for our generations ignorance and will be at the mercy of those decisions.

I really just want to know why we are so short sighted. So many people claim to want better things for their children, yet does nothing to accomplish it. We as a culture should be embarrassed that this discussion is even taking place. If earth is our home, shouldn't we show a little pride and try and improve it, rather than see who can destroy the most.

Thank you for taking the time to read. I am but one person with one opinion. No more right or wrong than anyone else. Many refer to our planet as MOTHER earth. I know one thing, I would never treat my mother like many mistreat our planet. We all share in the burden....

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in