This kind of thinking is becoming the norm

Prove the opposite.....

Circles buddy, circles...

 

Nope. Proof is only a few clicks away, but I tend to let people believe what they want to believe. I had a prof at LSU that said that most people operated on "Cronkite" facts, that sounds like you. Or, maybe your money comes from the preaching of AGW.

 

Both cows and I fart a lot....Red is right...Human and bovine activity both affect Antarctica !!!


!!!

 

About as much as you have.

 

I have to say that I'm torn on the subject.

On one hand, we have our planet. It's bigger than us and I don't mean in size. I know I'm stating the obvious, but it's a terribly complicated ecosystem. To mother earth, humans are a mild case of eczema. Should she decide that we're killing her, I have no doubts that she would rid herself of the parasitic homo sapiens. There is documented proof of climate changes, similar to what we experiencing now long before humans knew what a carbon footprint or internal combustion engine was.

On the other hand, how could anyone realistically not feel that humans have an impact. I really don't feel that humans are the cause of global warming, but do people really think that dumping tons of harmful toxins, gases, etc. into this terribly complicated ecosystem that we have barely scratched the surface of is not going to have a negative effect on the planet?

As with all subjects in which I find myself torn, I walk the line. I try to leave my surroundings as I found them or at least as close as possible. I try to consume less, but nothing drastic that inconveniences my life. It's just as easy to throw an aluminum can into the recyclable bin as it is the trash.

I (and I am sure most of you) don't really have the time necessary to devote to truly understanding all that there is to know on the subject, but when the scientific community reaches a near consensus on a subject, it would be foolish to not pay attention. As with anything, there are people on the fringe that take things too far. However, when I see people siding with the position that actually fights to allow more pollution, waste, etc. I really have to question their intelligence and motives. It just doesn't seem very smart.

 

The problem is that people think us being humans, no I will not apologize for using the earth or her resources, is always a negative impact. Why is a warmer Earth bad? How can these people claim to say that humans will make the Earth warmer to a point of no return? Historical Earth data says it's natural....

Like you said, entirely to many factors for a group of scientist, and I could give a chit less how many, to predict the future of a planet while only being alive on this planet, what, at .01 of its existence.


Take extinct animals for an example. Why do we protect them? What purpose do they serve? The Earth evolves right? Why rule out the possibility that the Earth might be better off.....


We are not bigger than Earth, and she shows us this every day....


http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/

 

thats true i spoke with her and she said this. after that i talked to my couch and a bag of nacho flavored bugles.
There is documented proof of climate changes, similar to what we experiencing now long before humans knew what a carbon footprint or internal combustion engine was.

i believe this is called "argument from incredulity". its not a strong argument format. "i cant believe...."

what people feel or think is not relevant. and its not like we are magically creating "toxins". the earth has things on it, and we move them around. we dont create or destroy anything. they are "toxins" if they poison you. the earth doesnt care about toxins because the earth is a thing, not a person. the earth doesnt define one thing or another as a toxin. and what some living things hate, others love. trees do not hate co2, they love it.

agree, and i know that aluminum is one thing that is actually efficient to recycle. i will buy the argument that making a smaller personal impact is fine. i enjoy being efficient. i turn off lights, i live in a small apartment because i have no need for extraneous things or stuff or consumption. but i wouldnt want to force others to conserve. in fact it is probally better for the economy to just use and use and use and consume. it probably helps the world to use and use and use.

[/quote]

decent point. but science makes mistakes. particularly on this sort of topic, and in general on topics with political implications.

 

And you'd have 400 more post stating facts to say otherwise....

If this is such a waste of your time, stop posting. Go live life in the "30 other threads".