by Zep 46 Replies latest social current
While I think that contrarians serve a useful purpose in challenging established viewpoints, sometimes they do a disservice by shouting their discontent so loudly and scoldingly that it stifles the debate.
I think that global warming is happening, and I don't think I'm a lefty liberal hippie idiot for thinking so.
I took an enviornmental biology course last semester and I can say quite confidently that the vast (vast!) majority of scientists believe global warming is a real problem.
Think about it this way: Wouldn't it be prudent to err on the side of caution and have stritcter standards for CO and CO2 emmissions? It's kind of like Pascals Wager --
If global warming is true and you lower pollution levels it's a long-term win for the human race with little loss of money.
If global warming isn't true and you do something about it all you've lost is some money for no real reason.
If global warming is true and you don't do something about it you gain in the short run and lose big time in the long run!
B.
I personally think our planet is alive and active. The things happening around us today are nothing compared to what the earth has done and can do.
Bryan
Have You Seen My Mother
Global warming is happening...the planet has been continuously heating up since 1850 by a whole degree Celsius. The question is what is causing the warming, and while there is no proof that human activity is causing it (which the naysayers like to say), there is evidence nonetheless and it should be taken seriously. Similarly, it has not been proven that Celebrex and Vioxx are dangerous, but the evidence indicating the possibility of this has resulted in action reducing possible harm (that is, taking the drugs off the market). Best to err on the side of caution even if the CO 2 and global warming link has not been proven -- it may ultimately be in our best economic interest in the long run.
Since the last ice age the earth has been slowly warming. Areas that were tundra have turned to swamp and then forest or grassland.
One warming activity that adds to the general trend is the cutting down of forests/trees. While the co2 issue is arguable, the tree cutting/warming thing isn't. But stopping the cutting of trees would have a huge affect on the pulp and paper and newspaper/media mega businesses, as well as govt and international trade. Take a guess as to why tree cutting is hardly mentioned.
North america has been steadily deforested since europeans settled here. South america has been getting into this act as well. Brazil is a huge forest cutter.
S
I'm amazed at some peoples concept of humanity. Hollywood is truly the ultimate success story.
REALITY is not THE MOVIES!
If there is going to be an earthquake, volcano,tsunami, killer tornado, killer hurricane, flood, ice age, oceans rising, asteroid collision, comet collision, little green men from Orion's Belt etc
There is NOTHING you can do about it!!!! Bruce Willis isn't going to "blow-up" the problem.You live in a fantasy where you exteem yourself as being much larger and more influential than you really are (very Dub). I'm not saying that means it's ok to pollute the planet, or to do nothing. It's just let's be real as individuals. For example the government in the US and some other "industrialized" nations banned CFC's to "protect the ozone." But I can still go to Mexico and buy it for next to nothing. It's the same mentality of restaurants that have no smoking sections right next to the smoking with no barrier- what's the point.
We (governments or individuals?) need to take certain indicators "seriously", how? What are YOU/WE gonna do? You think you'll get the world community to agree and do something (whatever that is)? Then you my friend are the definition of an optimist! remember movies aren't real.
If we are products of evolution (as many contend) and are thus animals, than we as a race are doing exactly what "evolution" has destined we should do. We are a destructive (although destructive is relative, are termites destructive- or just doing their job?) species and will in time "run our course" and disappear just like the deenosaurs. We are not stewards of this planet, merely PART of the bio/eco system on it. And as such owe no apologies for being at the top of the food chain (I don't actually believe this- purely a thought).
Nature will ultimately prevail, with or without "man". Remember to that you've only got about 80 years here- so enjoy them, they go by quick!
u/d
i'm glad you mentioned that about deforestation. i have a friend in alaska who says that acres of trees in the pristine Tongass forest are being cut down and left on the side of the road to rot. this is all part of Bush's deforesting plan. lumber mills won't take the free wood because it would still cost them money to obtain the lumber and haul it away. so there the giant logs sit. he has lived there for years and has noticed climate changes, including centuries-old glaciers beginning to melt.
The Forest Service loses millions of dollars a year as it hands over public trees for cutting by private companies. That?s not news. What is news is that the story is even worse than that, at least in some places, where the government has vastly overestimated demand for timber and consequently offered much more than needed to satisfy local mills.
Take the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. According to the Washington Post, one timber company, Whitestone Southeast Logging, abandoned and left to rot some 400,000 board feet of timber it deemed too expensive to get to the mill. All this went on in a roadless area.
The photographs above, taken by Skip Gray of the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, shows the aftermath of the Humpback-Gallagher timber sale on Chichagof Island. That ripped up hillside, formerly home to wildlife living in a forest, now home to stumps, belongs to you and me. The piles of logs beside the roads in these pictures were clearcut from the old growth forest but left to rot because they were deemed not sufficiently valuable.
Updated: 10/25/2004
In October 1999, President Clinton announced a plan to protect 40 million acres of USFS forest , as roadless areas. Get a map of the plan for your own state. Here is the Southern California part of the plan:
Only 18% of Forest Service lands -- the wilderness areas designated by Congress -- are currently protected from new road building. An additional 31%, or 60 million acres, are still free of roads but not permanently protected. But in December 2000 President Clinton published the Roadless Area Conservation Rule to protect those 60 million acres from road building and most logging. The rule has been challenged in lawsuits by states, tribes, and various interested parties but so far has been upheld in the courts .
Since 2000 the Bush Administration has been working on several fronts to overturn or weaken agreements aimed at protecting U.S. forests:
Guys the logging thing isn't accurate. I live in Colorado (lots of forest here) and while yes in the past poor management of the forests did happen. They are now a treasured and highly protected resource. Sometimes too protected as our recent HUGE wildfires can attest. Hundreds of thousands of acres of trees just went up in smoke (talk about CO2). And while the pictures and sitch of Alaska are deplorable, it is a drop in the bucket where that states forests are concerned (I agree the trees need to be preserved and "used" wisely). The great news is TREES GROW BACK (usually).
Many forests used for wood/paper are actually "farmed" these days.
Again I just find it amazing and arrogant that people in "first world" countries want people in "3rd world" countries to not squander their "resources". When they are trying to feed their families (yes at the expense of rain forest). This is a HUGE problem, but I have as yet to see the "world community" come up with a real solution.
We need a "God"?,
u/d
the Tongass was protected too....
If we are products of evolution (as many contend) and are thus animals, than we as a race are doing exactly what "evolution" has destined we should do. We are a destructive (although destructive is relative, are termites destructive- or just doing their job?) species and will in time "run our course" and disappear just like the deenosaurs. We are not stewards of this planet, merely PART of the bio/eco system on it. And as such owe no apologies for being at the top of the food chain (I don't actually believe this- purely a thought).
um, we are indeed stewards of this planet, and as such we have a responsibility to use its resources carefully and replenish what we take, not squander it. what will we leave for future genrations if we don't?
u/d
Not sure if you are referring to brazil as a 3rd world country. It isn't one anymore. I believe that it is producing more soya now than the usa does. It has a lot of industry and agriculture, and it's growing explosively. It has made a lot of trade deals, including some large ones w china.
S
Ps, while americans are watching reality tv, reality is changing without them noticing
Pps, god?? We need a god? Either there is god or there isn't. If there is, then we have one. But, he seems totally out of the loop, fell off the wagon somewhere. Notice that the most god fearing politician in north america is the most gungho antenvironmentalist around. It was that sinful heathen wiley clinton who was a bit interested in the environment. Isn't that strange??
