Is there ANYBODY in the world that still denies the severity of global warming?

[axi]

The following unprecedented events are occuring all over the world SIMULTANEOUSLY:

- In Central Europe (Germany, Chechoslovakia, Austria) and in some parts of Asia (Nepal) serious floods have resulted to the death of ~300 people and to the evacuation of whole cities, causing the displacement of hundends of thousands of people, despite this happening in one of the best equipped and organised regions of the world. Note that the best part of Europe has seen unprecedented rainfall, specially the Mediterranean areas, where the freaky weather has ruined tourism.

- In the biggest part of Asia (from Afghanistan to Malaysia, to Manchuria), a 3 km thick toxic smog has forced everybody to circulate wearing gas masks and has led to the death of up to 2.000.000 people due to respiratory problems. The smog has been caused by the uncontrollable burning of biomass by the local population and by the military operations in Afghanistan.

- In North America and some parts of Asia (India) crops are destroyed by an unprecedented drought.

My country shares this freaky weather too, although it has been spared the havoc caused in the rest of the continent. Half the country has seen no rain during the whole month, while the other half has had a 200-600% increase in rainfall. Temperatures (both min and max) in July were up 1-3 degrees above normal in every part of the country.

Every damn climatologist in the world is crying that all this is caused by global warming, which is caused by the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which are produced by human activities, mainly the petroleum industry and the consumption of fossil fuels for automotion and electricity.

The United States are the biggest producer of greenhouse gases and they have increased, along with Asia, their emmisions during the 90s, despite the Rio convention and the Kyoto protocol, which the United States government refuses to ratify. The American capitalists refuse to face the climate problem at it's root and choose a self-destructive hardliner policy which basicaslly says: screw the environment, screw the planet, all we care about is profit and more profit.

All these are well known. What I am really curious about is how many people (in the US mainly) still believe in all the crap that is served to them by the petroleum magnates and continue to support the policy of the Bush administration. Basically, I am really curious to see how many morons still roam free in that madhouse of country.

So what say you?

[Jon Miller]

There are a lot of people who doubt the severity of global warming

I for one think that global warming is one of the least concerning environmental concerns (I think it is slight and does not matter much compared to many other environmental problems)

I know many others who don't even think it exists

Jon Miller

[DinoDoc]

I wonder if this is the 100th and 1000th version of the same exact thread.

[axi]

What more proof do you need?

[Stefu]

Say, I was going to start a thread on this, but since there's already a global warming thread here, I'll just put it in here.

I have a quizzer for libertarians. It seems to me that many libertarians around here, when asked about whether government can set policies to fight against global warming, reply by denying that global warming is caused by humans.

Well, let's say that:

- There is irrefutable proof that global warming is happening
- There's also irrefutable proof that the main cause is human pollution
- Only way to prevent global warming is for government to severely regulate private enterprise
- Damages of global warming are significantly higher than costs of controlling for pollution

Do you think that under those conditions, it would be justified for government to regulate private enterprise?

[optimus2861]

Actually, the drought in Western Canada isn't unprecedented; there was a far worse drought in the 1930s that turned the Prairies into a big dustbowl. Some climatoligists here in Canada believe that it's a cyclical event, and that within the next 10-20 years this magnitude drought will occur again (if this isn't it, now). I haven't heard the term "global warming" applied once to this one.

See http://cbc.ca/news/features/drought2002_timeline.html for more info.

I don't mean to downplay the potential threat of global warming, or that we don't need to clean up our pollution problems, but at the same time, not every environmental problem needs to be blamed on the same boogeyman. That's just environmental alarmism.

[Ming]

Re: Is there ANYBODY in the world that still denies the severity of global warming?

Originally posted by axi
Basically, I am really curious to see how many morons still roam free in that madhouse of country.

Not only a bad troll... but an old troll. Don't come back until you can be more creative...
.00000001/10

[The Emperor Fabulous]

The cloud in Asia isn't a "cyclical event." Nor is the melting of the ice caps, the mass flooding of central Europe, or the drought in New England.

[DinoDoc]

Re: Re: Is there ANYBODY in the world that still denies the severity of global warming?

Originally posted by Ming
Not only a bad troll... but an old troll. Don't come back until you can be more creative...
.00000001/10

It's about time that people started to get banned for abusing dead horses in boring ways.

[frostycreep]

I agree with what axi is saying though. Sorry if that offends any Americans but I really do think that global warming is a major problem.

[Ming]

Originally posted by frostycreep
I agree with what axi is saying though. Sorry if that offends any Americans but I really do think that global warming is a major problem.

The fact that he says we are a cause of global warning doesn't offend me. We, LIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD, are causing it. I am offended when he calls us morons... and takes a hollier than thou attitude implying America is the only cause of global warming And that is why this is just a stupid and moronic troll... and one that has been done before as well...

[Ned]

Axi, Did you know that California has, on its own, passed a law limiting CO2 emissions of cars?

I also favor making choices in favor of reduced emissions. I am strongly in favor of nuclear power. The problem I see here in California is that we don't seem to want power plants here. We are quite content to buy power from outside the state at the cheapest prices. What this encourages is the building of cheap, high polluting plants in Mexico to ship power to California.

This said, the problem I personally have with "global warming" is that the "forecast" weather for the United States and Canada is "good." We will see a 100% increase in agriculture primarily due to longer growing seasons. As well, the longer growing seasons by themselves, not only here, but across the entire north, will benefit agriculture and also act as a major CO2 sink.

With all this in mind, it will be very hard for Americans to accept draconian choices to reduce global warming when the beneficiaries, if any, will be those outside the United States. It will also be very hard to pursuade Americans when we are singled out while major polluters such as India and China are not. (What is this "war in Afghanistan" bit? More outrageous anti-American crap.)

In fact, I don't understand Europe. Europe as a whole also stands to benefit. Why are they the leaders in draconian measures?

[Gary]

Probably just pissed about Kyoto and Bush and all that goes with it.

[Jac de Molay]

This said, the problem I personally have with "global warming" is that the "forecast" weather for the United States and Canada is "good." We will see a 100% increase in agriculture primarily due to longer growing seasons. As well, the longer growing seasons by themselves, not only here, but across the entire north, will benefit agriculture and also act as a major CO2 sink.

But can we know for sure that what you describe will happen? So far, at least the last ten years, there has been significantly less rainfall in the agricultural states like Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan. Furthermore, the levels of the Great Lakes are the lowest they've been in the last century. So far, these "optimistic" predictions have not occured

It's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff when attributing current conditions to global warming.

[Juggernaut]

I don't mind if it gets a few degrees warmer up here. We'll certainly improve in soccer.