It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Heike
This thread has brought up a question in my mind, and let me say that I am not being facetious or sarcastic, it's a serious question.
I am constantly reminded that here in America we are something like the top 10% of the world as regards our standard of living. Many countries are not yet industrialized except for some of their larger cities. I see TV shows about people living in huts with no electricity, farmers still doing things with oxen or other animals, people whose primary forms of transportation are bicycles and/or animals, or their own two feet, even pictures on the internet of 'uncontacted tribles' living very primitively.
So my question is, how much global impact are the 'modern' nations having? What percentage of the world's land mass (or total mass, not sure if the oceans should figure in but maybe they should) contains modern industrialized populations giving off pollution and CO2? On a global scale, how much of the Earth is really affected (afflicted?)? And shouldn't mostly unpopulated land masses like the Arctic and Antarctic figure in too?
...But it's the one that the Global Warming Cult always seems to focus on. Forget the science, go for the personal attacks. You assess the science, CO2 has never driven warming and water vapour is far more significant a greenhouse gas. Hey, let's ban water!!
The science argues firmly against global warming. And this can be cited in numerous peer-reviewed publications in journals such as Science, Nature etc. I challenge you to debate the science of it, not the people behind it on either side.