Quote:
|
Originally Posted by filtherton
You're pretty casual with the whole extinction thing, aren't you?
|
Yes. Adapt or die.
Quote:
|
There isn't an organism that can adapt to everything. How can you be certain that polar bears will adapt and how can you advocate that kind of wait and see approach when the natural existence of an entire species might possibly be in the balance?
|
I look at it in terms of what is more important the quality of life for people or the quality of life of for example polar bears. We know that when we try to manipulate nature we suffer unintended consequences. I am not comfortable that we know enough about global warming or polar bears at this time to come up with a real plan. For example will using E85 have an impact on either, what about increased use of nuclear power, how do we know that current emision controls are not working and will restore "balance" over time, etc, etc.
Quote:
|
I think that objective science has already told us that the globe is warming because of industrial and fossil fuel greenhouse gases.
|
The UN published a report stating that domesticated live stock is a major contributor to greenhouse gases causing global warming. Are you willing to give up beef and milk products? Should developing third world nations stop raising cattle as a needed source of protien? Who determines how much is too much?
Quote:
|
And actually, you're wrong about what kind of solutions i would accept and reject. I don't care much for the long term welfare of industries who can't exist without doing unreasonable and possibly irreversible damage to the world. Besides, how can you possibly justify putting industry ahead of averting a planet scale catastrophe?
|
In a way I agree. I think the true cost (including environmental costs) should be reflected in the goods we purchase. If those costs are truely reflected the market would ensure our environment is protected. When the government subsidizes certain industries, like oil, coal, etc. it has a tendency to hurt inovation in other areas.
Quote:
|
In any case, here's an explanation: the earth is constantly being fed energy by the sun and it is constantly relinquishing some of that energy back into space. The idea with global warming, as i'm sure you're aware, is that the buildup of greenhouse gases is causing the earth to retain more of that energy and relinquish less. So to answer your question, everything other than the earth is getting colder. Energy that would have previously been reflected back into space is being reflected into space no longer and is hanging around, heating up ur planit. More open water won't necessarily lead to more cloud cover and more cloud cover won't necessarily lead to cooler temperatures.
|
At one point most of the planet was tropical, at another the planet had an ice age, and at another point we have conditions as they are now. some how the earth has an ability to regulate its temprature. There has to be more to the explanation you provided.
Quote:
|
I'm not a global warming expert, so i just defer to the thousands of scientists for whom the evidence passes muster. I'm fairly certain that the evidence supporting global warming is a lot more compelling than any evidence that polar bears will adapt to their new environmental problems.
|
Is there a paticular source(s) or study that you used to help you make up your mind? If so what is it?