The great debate as to wether mans eager consumption of fossil fuels contributes to, or indeed is the cause of, global warming seems to me a useless one. Does it really matter? None of the fossil fuels are an infinate resource, and the majority of what’s left of the crude oil is to be found in areas of the world not exactly known for stability. Shouldn’t we be making every effort to lesson our dependence on them as soon as possible, regardless of global warming?
News and comments on global climate change, global warming and greenhouse effect
As long as we eliminate the dependence on oil & coal, it doesn’t matter what anyone believes about GW. The world will be a better place once a clean sustainable energy source replaces the current one.
yes i guess, but we need 2 know the cause of global warming in order 2 prevent it so the cause is kinda important
It matters cuz if we are the ones who influinced it or whatever, then it would be easier 4 us 2 take care of the situation. Also we would be laying responsibility where it need 2 be laid
actually what you stated about oil is completely incorrect. How do scientists know how much oil is left? Can they somehow stick some sensor to measure how much is left? No, they BS us. Wonderful that we all buy into it, isn’t it?
You have a very good point. But I think what we are trying to do now is to educate the public about emission of greenhouse gasses so that while the common people can do their best to walk to work or school, the government agencies and scientists can come up with something really smart.
we have plenty of oil but cant get it due to tree huggers. funny how china can drill off the coast of our country but we cant.
global warming is happening a touch, but its due to the sun not us. there s too much money to be made by ther alarmists
Global warming is a natural cycle of nature. Man has nothing to do with it. Did man also cause the ice age? Anyone that thinks differently is wrong.
The reason that people think it is important to know if it is caused by man is because if it is, then it is probably harmful and we need to stop and/or reverse the problem. If it isn’t, then it is a natural phenomenon that we need not worry about. Personally, I think it is the latter, but that doesn’t mean we can’t still find cleaner, more dependable sources of fuel.
The reason it matters, is that if we are the problem, then we can be the solution. Sure, we should all consume less of everything. But some people just don’t want to. When it becomes a matter of life or death, we must change our way of living.
I agree with you but they won’t do this because they make too much money off of it so they will use it till it’s gone or nearly gone. There is a patent for a fuel efficient carburator engine which apparently use less gas than our conventional fuel injected cars. Why are car makers making these more efficient cars. Big Business in oil and gas is why.
You can apparently find this patent and build your own fuel efficient engine but there’s not alot of people who are able to do this.
You’re pretty much right. However, before we run out of fossil fuels, the damage by then we’ve done to our planet will be irreversible. Yes, we should be lessening our dependence on fossil fuels. If not to stop global warming, to at least allow civilization to stay in one piece once that last drop of oil is pumped out of the ground.
The reality is that global warming is caused by man. It will become worse as we release more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. What will happen, other than blistering hot summer days and warm winters? Who knows? Any number of things can happen – natural disasters such as hurricanes, an ice age to the degree the planet has never seen before, perhaps even a toxic atmosphere which will poison the very air we breathe in.
We developed countries need to do something about it. America hasn’t even ratified the Kyoto Protocol. With my country, Australia, ratifying it, it leaves America as the only developed country in the world that hasn’t ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Will America let itself be the country that said no to saving the world? Sadly, probably yes.
A stitch in time saves nine also prevention is better then cure, as you know the alteration in weather seriously affects the echo system, plants, animals, humans, any way pollution is not a good idea, you know the humans are the biggest litter bugs, they have even invaded the space instead of cleaning their own………
truthfully, not a bit- it really doesn[t matter who or how its caused. I do believe we should all try to help lessen its effects as best we can. Its totally dishonest to believe as some politicans and some others that its all mans fault that this is happeneing. I’m all for doing my part to help develop alternate resources but I am totally against people using it as a scare tactic and then trying to benefit from it. If you develop a technology that betters our current system by all means use it. But dont try to cram it down everyones throat.
It’s not a debate any longer. In fact, it has been widely accepted as fact 20+ years ago. Why the inaction? Greed. It’s ALL ABOUT THE MONEY honey and always will be.The same holds true for our Health Care Industry and Pharmaceuticals’ murdering of millions of Americans by not providing proper care or medicine: Greed, It’s ALL About the Money. Read Green Paradise Lost by Elizabeth Dodsen Grey and Natural Cures They Don’t Want You to Know About by Keven Trudeau (#1 on NY Times Best Seller List).
It certainly is prudent to make efficient use of resources. But if we divert our efforts and money to things that we cannot control, it makes less available for the things we can help.
They tell us this to show us, "Look at what you’ve done, now clean it up."
I think it does matter whether or not global warming is or isn’t caused by human activity. To the extent that we can, we should lessen our harmful impact on the environment, if in fact we are causing it.
If we are causing it and can identify what we are doing, then we are better able to choose alternative ways to provide energy.
Point well taken about lessening our dependence on foreign oil. It would behoove us to do that for a variety of reasons (more control over our own energy resources; eliminate dependency on oil from unstable regions of the world, etc.).
Lastly, alternative sources of energy could help to create jobs and provide for a cleaner environment. This makes sense regardless of what is causing global warming.
I agree we should be working to lessen our dependence upon fossil fuels as fast as possible. But the debate about global warming is not useless. The remaining fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal) in the world will last another 100 – 200 years. Oil will run out first, but we have large quantities of gas and coal. Long before fossil fuels run out, the impact of global warming will be felt world wide, and the predictions for catastrophe are enormous. The largest impact will be the rise of sea level, affecting 10s of millions of people around the world.
it matters because we humans have the unique capability among all species of controlling what we do. if we truly acted as stewards of this fragile planet on which we are fortunate to have found the conditions for life, we should perhaps behave as if we cared about what future generations have to contend with as we continue to consume and waste as we have done for the 300 or so years, during which time the population has grown exponentially.
Yes, we should reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and small but significant strides are being made. Sadly, we are misled if we think that electrical/hybrid cars are significantly better than gasoline engines. electricity is generated in nuclear power plants (I have no problem with these though some do), by burning coal (very polluting and finite), or by damming rivers to create hydroelectric plants (not popular with those who want to preserve the wilderness). there’s a cost to the environment to be paid no matter what we do. we need to get over our belief that we need huge 8-cylinder assault vehicles and do what the Europeans have done for generations: go small, very small. what sense does it make for one person to drive a vehicle designed to hold 6 or 7 people? what sense does it make to have more than two children?
we can’t control what other people do, but we can provide a good example and make our own planet-friendly choices.
it’s like the last straw, we may be contributing just enough to make the difference. so do you want to take the risk
Well, there isn’t any "debate–" the human causes of global warming are proven fact.
But either way–yes, it is very important. The reason is simple: the fact that global warmming is caused by humans means we can stop it. We might–or might not–be able to do much about a natural cycle.
The thing you need to keep in mind is to get past the propagada and wild predictios–on either side. The science isn’t nearly as colorful as the "deniers" pretty wwebsites–but it is correct.
The other thing is to recognize WHAT needs to be done–and wha tthe consequences of diong it are. Here’s some examples of actions we can takke–and their other consequences:
>increase fuel efficiency of automobiles and promote a transition to electric or other non-gas using transportation. Effects: reduced consumer costs, independance from forign oil.
>Expanded mass transit. Effects: lower commutingcosts for individuals, reduced traffic congestion and cost of roadbuilding/maintainence
>Energy efficient homes/gadgets (such as compact flourescent lights, efficient appliences). Effect: long-term savings offset initioal cost, pllus further savings in reduced utility bills.
> Wind turbines for electric power. Effect: reduced costs to consumers.
>Solar energy: Effect: low operating cost fo r user. Initial cost is still high–but falling rapidly
>Nuclear power–Effect: lower consumer costs–current technology reduces the once high operating cost,and also resolves the safety and storage issues.
There’s more–but I think I’vemade the point. Energy effciency and alternative means of producing energy are not only good for the environment, do’t produce CO2–they are also more efficient, and cheaper. In addition, these growth industries create jobs and spur economic growth.
So what’s the big fuss about doing this? Simple: the oil and coal companies are the losers–and they are the ones who have been dictating energy policy for years. The "debate" isn’t real–it is manufactured by them to delay or deflect policy changes because in a really free market, they cannotcompete with modern alternative methods of generating and using energy.
To most of us, it doesn’t matter, but to those who want to use the "global warming" myth to their advantage, it matters a lot.
Since it’s debatable whether humans cause climate changes or not, it’s important for these same powers to push the hoax to get their agenda for higher taxation passed.
There’s actually no real connection between using oil and "global warming" except the one created by Gore and other opportunists. Remember, there’s a whole lot of money pushing this hoax.
Notice that the ones who vehemently support the "global warming" hoax are either politicians or environmental scientists who depend on the money that this hoax robs from the average tax-payer.
The good thing is that we’ve been consistently decreasing pollution levels in the US since the 80′s. I’m all for conserving resources and eliminating pollution, so I’m glad we lead the world in that area.
The real solution is to follow normal market trends. The US should be allowed to drill for oil since other countries are allowed to do this. Nuclear power is a safe alternative and there are new methods of burning coal that produce virtually no pollutants. We need power sources to keep such a robust economy going, so decreasing resources is not a solution. Alternatives are great, but the market should make the decisions, not the politicians.
At the moment, oil is the fuel that powers everything we do. It’s used in just about every product we use from plastics to clothing to electronic devices. We have tons of oil available in this country if we are only allowed to drill for it.
When oil reserves starts decreasing, the market will shift as different fuels become necessary. There are a lot of ideas in the works and even other ways of extracting oil from the earth, so we should support those who want to keep the economy rolling instead of those who want us to go back to the stone age.
I think it is caused by man and if the goverment understands that they can do something about it.
We shouldn’t let such a good resource to waste and such a good resource it is. It has allowed us to become prosperous and live better than kings did 100 years ago.
If global warming is caused by man then Al Gore has reason to charge more taxes. If not then everyone can keep their wallet. To by air condition devices for the heat.
It matters because if humans are not causing GW, then oil companies can still get filthy rich without restrictions from the government. They don’t care about running out of oil; they will be dead by then so they want to reap the benefits now.
maybe
People didn’t cause global warming but they did speed the process by a few thousand years. What sped it up was over consumption of fossil fuels and our arrogance that we could just continue to ravage the earth without consequence. Too late to quibble now. we just have to eat our just desserts when the time fully gets here…shouldn’t be long now.