your thoughts on this so called global warming propaganda

[droodles]

enwiabe

good game my friend

[ninwa]

So far, I haven't seen enough evidence, or a plausible enough rebuttal to the counter-arguments, to prove to me that global warming is a reality.

However, even if global warming didn't exist, I don't see why it's so bad to do something for the environment and cut down on greenhouse gas emissions anyway.

[hard]

The reason why it's so bad to actually do something to cut down greenhouse gas emissions isn't as easy as it sounds. It may seem to most of the "public" that some renwable source of energy will be discovered and hopefully end all CO2 emissions. But even if every human on the planet was to use hybrid cars, solar energy etc. there is no way greenhouse gases can be lowered more than 10-20%. Our whole lives are based on this perception that we are dying of global warming but the reality is that it's always been like this and there is no way to change it. It's a cycle of earth's behavior and it's just political bs that some former vice-presidents and bunch of hippies try convince people with minds to think for them selves that this is actually plausible. Its nonsense and all this is just to make some extra 2 cent cash for these monkeys who prance around acting like some prophets who have the answer to our "green house" doomsday.
Even if the slightest chance that global warming is true, which in my opinion is absured, there's no way out. Buying that hybrid car actually costs more money for you, adds thousands to CEO paychecks and has little dividends for the consumer.
Think wisely rather than irrationally.

[Mao]

as much as you'd like to argue that global warming is not reality and continue on within your own little economical construct, you cannot fail to realise that record his and lows of many things in the weather are being seen everywhere, huge hurricanes and freakish droughts.

that, even in a fool's eyes, is alarming.

[costargh]

Firstly we don't have "finite" resources.

HUH?

[Collin Li]

as much as you'd like to argue that global warming is not reality and continue on within your own little economical construct, you cannot fail to realise that record his and lows of many things in the weather are being seen everywhere, huge hurricanes and freakish droughts.

that, even in a fool's eyes, is alarming.

La Nina, El Nino, things that we cannot control? It is stupid to take something that is alarming then point to something and say that is what is causing it. No one is denying what is happening to the world.

[Collin Li]

Okay, bad things happening to Earth. Therefore, governments should rush to sign the Kyoto protocol. Is that your argument?

I don't see the logical connection. The weakest link of the argument that is typically offered, and the one that will be the topic of all global warming debates is: do carbon dioxide emissions actually cause these things?

[Collin Li]

Okay, perhaps they should do something about it. But what makes you think carbon emissions are what is causing it?

[lacoste]

carbon dioxide is already proven along with other chemicals (catlysts) contributing to global warming. so your debate is obviously unnecessary.

if there were no cars on earth or if there are not as much cars emitting co2, then the temperatures would not be as high as it is now.  

[costargh]

I thought there were heaps of studies that proved that global warming is real

[Collin Li]

lacoste:

If you actually read hard's post, he addresses many of the failures of studies that attempt to prove the link. It is far from a proven link.

Unlike ozone depletion, which has been proven.

[lacoste]

coblin:

I have read his post and who exactly is 'hard', a scientist? i doubt it. there is no source of his posts.



and also the rate of ozone depletion i believe in 2008 is in a different pattern to the years <2000

[Collin Li]

Are you a scientist? It doesn't actually matter because what he presents are not scientific facts and empirical evidence. It only takes a logical mind to present valid challenges to the 'evidence.'

[jcc]

I have read his post and who exactly is 'hard', a scientist? i doubt it. there is no source of his posts.

Half of hard's posts seem to be plagiarised verbatim from websites:

http://www.sitewave.net/news/s49p1837.htm
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2005/08/pollution_in_ch.html
http://economics.about.com/cs/macroeconomics/a/run_out_of_oil.htm

[Collin Li]

Yeah, I suspected that myself. I'm not sure whether that makes the points more credible, or less.