Number 1 MUST know fact

While we're talking about what's in the air...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070531/wl_nm/italy_drugs_dc

But any rate about the thread I don't think we can just conclude based on some empircal evidence that global warming is happing like your post above Karea.

Ever think that improvements in communication, and our detecting abilities, AND the fact that there are more people to experience the pain from those natural disasters accounts for something?

Particularly those tornadoes in Brazil.

But I would still support stopping the green house gases going into the air based solely on the innate knowledge of what's to come...sooner or later, there's going to be too much CO2.

You can't undo this kind of thing once there's too much

Ok, just some economic knit picking here.

What you're saying is partially true, but not the whole picture. First of all, no firm will reduce emessions on their own: the fixed costs are simply too high. Then there is the problem of being the first to implement this sort of technology: you pour money in R&D, implement the tech, only to have your competitors copy it at very little costs. So some sort of subsidy needs to be in place, or some sort of penalty system.

As for this movement away from fossil fuels being good for the economy all I can say is: who knows. While it is true that jobs will be created, countless other jobs will also be lost in industries that are no longer competative. Furthermore, there will be short run to long run market fluctuations on a very large scale. In a word, it will be very nasty early on, and might continue to be very nasty for a long time.

But I do agree with you that something should be done. You're just going to have a hard time conviencing people that they should go first.

AK

Right on...they'll only change when it's good for their pocketbooks. They'll die before they take a hit on their pocket books.

Most people probably subconciously view that without money, they're going to die whether the world explodes or it remains.

They NEED to have the new clothes, they NEED to have money so they can be providers to some random broad they don't know, they NEED that cool car, they NEED etc etc etc more than they need this earth and it's clean air.

Pretty pathetic huh

For those of you who dont believe global warming is a reality....

On the west coast of south africa africa, the whole streth of it is full of fishing towns, they make their living off fishing. This year, threre are no fish to be found(well, not in the same quntities). After further investigation, they realised that the ocean temp was higher than it normally is this time of year, and they had moved to cooler water closer to the cape point.

As a result there are 20 or so towns where the population are battling to make ends meet.

I agree with AK's post, this is not something that can be just be fixed, it will have to be of a long term view. Causing a reccession is not gonna help anyone either.

Unfortunately we live in a global village, where if the US markets take a tumble, so do ours and alot of other markets. It could spell disaster on a pretty big scale.

Its defintately something that would need to implemented very slowly, and like AK said, would need to be subsidised.
Riddler

As long as the CEOs run things....and their only concern boosting/maintaining profits...it's going to be at least decades until these gradual implementations add up to anything significant.

It's already been decades and look at what's been done

Isnt this what we are talking about here parts of the world like Europe freezing over and changing the climate, NOT the whole world freezing over.

For the whole world to freeze over it would take something like the earth going out of orbit, tilting on its axis, or a comet, something beyond anyones control. Thats why I think people saying the whole world is gonna freeze over is just a scare tactic.

Maybe thats the problem in Europe, maybe you guys believe the media way too much. The media tries to push here too, but we don't have a one sided media unlike Europe which pretty much too politically correct.

Again the reason alot in the US dont believe it is because the evidence is contriversial.

I use to believe in global warming. Until one day I heard an actaul sceintist speak on the raido about, the locla raido station called the head scientist of some weather institute he said there is no conclusive eveidence that this global warming stuff is true. He said if the earth ever cools down it will be because of some natural phenomenon not something man made. Alot of the global warming stuff is hippie influnced science.

Seriuosly if this where really true an this is going to happen within 10 years or so. Do you seriuosly think that the US govenrment is just gonna sit by and do nothing and let this event happen that can cause the balance of power to shift ireversably. When they spend trillions of dollars in weaponery and other stuff to make sure that balance stays the same. C'mon now use your head.

Dont you think if the thier scientist confirmed this for a fact that they would actually do something right now?

Karea, probably enough people believe in global warming here but no one's going to do anything about it.

The entire way of life is more fearful of having enough money to pay for each individual's credit card debt, degenerate provider life style, must have right now, etc.

People are more afraid of having zero money than they are afraid of losing quality air to breathe.

And they should be...look at the tv, or even Jesse's newsletters about marketing.

And plenty of people here will NOT go against the republicans due to democrats moral/semi-communist issues. These people just won't budge.

Which is a shame cause the only ones that care about global warming are the democrats.

The South Americans don't help either...those trees they chop down can at least minimize the damage being done

Private. You must be a registered member to view this post.

Private. You must be a registered member to view this post.

Oftentimes advertisements and endorsements work to influence people POSTIVELY.

However, other times when certain people endorse an idea they will go to influence in the negative direction.

Some people don't like Gore. And even for that they will throw out the global warming idea. They'll just say "gore sucks dick" "gores an idiot" "Gore said he invented the internet...he's full of shit" etc

Even if you doubt that there is a global warming or that's it's resulting from man's activity or whatever, you should take it into consideration. And thus take preventive measures in case it would be true. (I'm not only talking about global warming, but also about GE crops, waves generated by TV, Mobile phone base stations, Micro waves, WIFI, and so on).

You could just wait for scientists (not affiliated to any firms) to prove this or that doesn't represent any danger for the population, and then plant your GE crops, build some Mobile phone base stations over school roofs, or release giga tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

But no, because it would represent a big short term loss of profit. It's easier to close your eyes on environment and health hazards claiming it's a hippie thing rather than adapt yourself to the situation and invest your money in innovation. Besides, who gives a f***, you may not even see and face the consequences of your actions.

This being said, many US firms understood too well this new ecological market and saw in it a new way to make a shitload of money.

This thread is taking the predictable "us vs them" flavor.

Anyway, other then watching the movie, what do you suggest people do, K?

Private. You must be a registered member to view this post.

It's the end of the world, my friends!!

Private. You must be a registered member to view this post.