Quote: red55 said.... All that is true, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. You are sooooooooo confused. What we are talking about is the Age of Man, OK, not millions of years ago nor millions of years from now, Darwin. Were are talking about the relatively short amount of time that man has been on the planet until the time of our ultimate extinction. Are you still with me? Now, during our time on the planet, there were many centuries when we lived like animals. But about 10,000 years ago humans began living in cities and agriculture began, there was an accompanying beginning with the deforestation of the earth which has continued to the present day and is rapidly accelerated. This caused a rise in the warming curve, not a huge one, but a real one. It is man-made and can be addressed simply by serious reforestation. But the big rise began with the industrial revolution, when we began to pump billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere. It really has risen on a steeper curve in the 30th century. Now we can address this pollution, too. We don't need to stop global cycles, it is futile to do so, and that is not what anyone is trying to do. It is a straw man from the deniers. But the spike we're living in is human-caused and can significantly bring on mass extinctions within 200-300 years, far sooner than the planet would do naturally in millions of years. Humans would not survive mass extinctions of the crops and animals that we depend upon for sustenance. Addressing the human-caused pollution that threatens us is entirely doable. Quote: kidrock said.... Red, I do not post often at all in any of these forums but you seem like a smart guy. Tell me what are the plans to feed the billions of people much less provide a decent way of life on this planet with what is being proposed buy any body of policy makers. Pardon me, but what does that have to do with the validity of global warming? I just thought that as the population increased from 1 billion around 1800 and is now around 7 billion in 2011 and man caused global warming by shifting from burning wood to coal to oil, you could help me out with how we are going to use energy to sustain the population growth. i may level out, but and we replace one fuel type with another population has increased.Transportation systems, farming techniques, modern health care products, all of the uses that we derive from natural gas in our lives we need to develop new means to power our world population. I am all for going forward with whatever we can do to help fix our "human problem." The planet is warming and mankind is not helping out but wind farms without better storage options is not cost effective. Do what we can do best now and do the research like hell for the future. When the US decided to go to the moon, no one could get there but we did it. Let us spend what money the US has to work to the future and not spend it on things that do not give a good return on investment. I think it can be done in the US but the rest of the world still has not gone to the moon and I think we need a little help to solve the word problem.
That's crap. The planet is not doing anything different than it has, cyclically, for billions of years. We are no more than a mosquito and if we really harm the planet it will merely flick us off with it's thumb and middle finger.
religious folks want to feel guilty/important. christians want to think god gave his only son for them. liberals want to think humans are so relevant and important that they are ruining the planet. sociology 101.
Maybe you are right, maybe we are just pausing between the next ice age. We still need to feed 8 billion people and clear water is needed to drink. I think we can live on this planet without messing it up too much if we could figure out a way to live within the resources we have in the world without having to revert to living in trees or caves.
the solution to overpopulation is economic advancement and free trade. basically the opposite of the proposed solutions to global warming. developed countries do not grow, they dont have kids. so outsourcing jobs and bringing third world countries up economically, this will make them have less kids. not that we need to worry about overpopulation anyways. we are not overpopulated, and when it happens it will solve itself, which will happen long after we are dead, and will not kill us, but will kill the poor brown idiot people.
but you are the one asking for change, you are the one asking to tax or whatever it is you want! you are the one who has to convince us that climate change is unprecedented, when it clearly is wildy precedented and evidence for it is everwhere.
Another way to think about it is only the strongest survive. People in countries that haven't developed a government that works and have invested in infrastructure will have a hard time surviving. America is rich because we have developed our country to support ourselves. Poor African countries that are starving haven't been able to do so. They haven't done the things needed to provide for feeding their population. There is a population problem on earth. Some countries have been able to keep up with their people's needs. Some haven't and the population is dieing because of it.
correct. and the reason we are a developed country is that we had smart white people to set up a government and economy based on freedom. capitalism and free trade are the reason we dont have any real problems here. basically you can take any given country, ask how much free market capitalism they have, and know how happy and rich they are. its basically all that matters. its true, most africans are stupid and cant see what is important. so they allow themselves to be led by idiots. it is a good thing they are so stupid because as china improves we are gona need these dumb blacks to hit the factories and start producing things for us cheaply.
