Does anyone think that the political leaders will be able to have enough willpower to stop global warming?

Question

Does anyone think that the political leaders will be able to have enough willpower to stop global warming?

Answer 1

Many people have the “will”, I think the question is do they have the “way”?

Answer 2

What u base your info on is the CO2 or methane. Look for the truth eventually those that perpetrated this will be liable. Are  u rich  ,it is designed to save the fossil fuels for the rich  , where are u I bet u are cheering for the wrong people.

Answer 3

If they all suddenly decided to devote 24 hours a day to stopping it.. there is NOTHING they can do.  We don't have the technology to destroy the sun ( as if we'd want to do it anyway ).. and it is the cause.

Answer 4

The theory of man-made global warming is false.  Rather than just giving evidence proving that global warming is based on misrepresented evidence I will directly address the points made by global warming scientists.  If you do not plan on reading my post (I know it is long) I would ask you to watch this video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...  this video makes many of the points I will be making.  Now I will list the points that global warming scientists make: 1. CO2 causes an increase in global temperature. 2.  The IPCC has produced a report on the issue.  3. Computer models predict what we are saying.  4. There is a scientific consensus on the issue/all major scientists agree on man-made global warming/the only people who disagree are paid by the oil companies.  5. Major Politicians, CEO’s, scientists, etc agree.  6.  Even if there is a chance that global warming is real we should do everything we can, it can’t hurt.

1.  This is the main point made by global warming scientists. Data does in fact show that temperature and CO2 are correlated, however the nature of the correlation has been overlooked.  Global warming scientists say that an increase of CO2 causes global temperatures to rise, but this is not the case; a rise in global temperatures causes a rise in CO2.  Using the same graph featured in “An Inconvenient Truth”, (the graph where Al Gore goes up on the cherry picker, the data from the ice core), the graph clearly shows a lag in CO2 as compared to global temperature.  Temperature starts to go up 800 years before CO2 begins to rise.  This happens because of the oceans.  CO2 released by natural or man-made sources is mostly absorbed into the ocean, when the global temperature raises it gradually increases the ocean temperature which releases CO2 and other gasses into the atmosphere.  Also most of the warming occurred before 1940 when industrialization was not as great.  One would believe that if global warming is tied to CO2 it would accelerate in the post WWII period, but it didn’t.  The globe actually cooled for 4 decades after WWII, when industrialization was the greatest.  Now take a look at our atmosphere as it relates to greenhouse gasses.  CO2 makes up .03% of our atmosphere, a very small amount of our atmosphere.  Other greenhouse gasses like water vapor make up 1-4% of the atmosphere.  Now take a look at where CO2 comes from, all human activity combined produces 6.5Gt of CO2 per year.  Volcanoes alone match that number.  All animals combined (meaning respiration, decomposition, etc) produce 150Gt of CO2.  So humans produce a very small amount of CO2 which itself makes up a very small amount of our atmosphere.  Water vapor is acknowledged to be the major greenhouse gas, and all of that is produced via evaporation (i.e. naturally).  

I know some of you may be thinking “ha, he acknowledges the greenhouse effect.”  To you I ask you to read a science textbook, the greenhouse effect is real and plays a very important role in maintaining a livable temperature on the earth.  Global warming scientists cite the greenhouse effect via our emission CO2 as the source of global warming.  They are disproved by their own words.  As I said before the greenhouse effect is real and causes heat to become trapped in the troposphere which warms the earth.  So if human emission of CO2 is to be blamed we would expect the troposphere to be warming and thus increasing the surface temperature (the temperature cited on global warming graphs) of the earth but look for yourself: http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature... the troposphere is actually cooling, only the surface temperature is rising.  This warming is not due to the greenhouse effect it is due to the sun.

It makes sense, the sun is the ultimate source of all of our energy.  Studies have shown that the effect of sunspots much more closely correlates to the rise in temperatures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sunsp... http://www.livescience.com/environment/0...

http://web.dmi.dk/solar-terrestrial/spac...

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/...

The other planets in our solar system are also warming. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/ma...

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?art...

All this data points to the sun as the source for our current warming, and what about those ice core studies?  http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/artic...

Here are the results of the ice core studies they show a very cyclic effect in regard to global temperatures.  The global warming crowd also argues that weather disturbances will become more likely but the actual numbers show no increase.  Oh and the glaciers, they have retreated and advanced every year since the earth began, they melt in the summer and build up in the winter.

2.  The IPCC, http://www.ipcc.ch/, is the main source of data for those in support of global warming, and has been very controversial.  In a prior report a graph, the so called “hockey stick” graph, was shown to be forged.  A reprint of the report had to be issued but the damage was done.  The fake graph was the main point made in the report, all data rested on its accuracy.  When an independent review took place the data used to make the graph was shown to be made up, that’s a fact even the IPCC admitted the fraud.  Now allegations have been made that the IPCC has censored the report and refused to take scientists names off the contributors list.  Contributing scientists have alleged that their passages, which were critical of man-made global warming, were taken out of the report.  15 passages in all are alleged to have been cut from the report.  Scientists have also said that their names are on the contributors list even though they left the committee after finding their objections to global warming were ignored.  These scientists left the committee but the IPCC refused to take their names off the contributors list so that they can claim all major scientists agree with them.  The IPCC is a heavily partisan committee that went into session fully knowing that their report would be in favor of global warming, any scientist who disagreed was censored.

3.  Computer models are predictions; they are based on hundreds of assumptions.  If even one assumption is wrong the whole model is incorrect.  Every computer model is based off the assumption that man is the main cause of global warming, which if you’ve read the above paragraphs, should be questioned.  Another disparity occurs in the amount of CO2 released, most models have two times the amount of CO2 being released than is actually seen.  You may wonder why these programmers are being so bold with their outrageous assumptions; the fact is these models predict the climate 50 to 100 years from now.  These programmers will be retired or dead before their models can be proven accurate or inaccurate.

4. This is the most blatant lie made by the global warming crowd; there is no scientific consensus on this issue.  Here are the names of over 17,000 scientists who disagree.  http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm  This lie of scientific consensus is purely propaganda meant to make you believe without evidence.  Consider for a second, what does scientific consensus mean?  This may sound silly but imagine that all the scientific community got together and decided that humans can fly unassisted, does this mean it’s true, no.  Science is not politics, issues are not voted on, and truth is not based on which outcome is most accepted, if it was we would be the center of the universe not to mention the earth would be flat.  Those were the scientific consensus of the time, but experimentation has proved them to be wrong.

5.  A recent poll has shown that only 8% of the population believes that global warming is not man-made.  Everyone else believes global warming is man-made and this will affect the world either in this generation or sometime soon.  This accounts for the support of politicians and CEO’s.  Politicians see their constituents believe global warming and the politician jumps on the global warming band-wagon to get votes.  CEO’s and presidents of corporations also see the poll data and try and get customers by pledging their support.  Price differences between stores are often not that great, so leaders of these corporations want to gain customers based on “morals.”  Scientists love the global warming hype; more and more funding is being poured into various institutions for scientists to use.  Scientists find applying for grants easier with this increase in money.  Scientists can get media face time and get studies published before moving on to their real interests.  You may wonder why so many ordinary people believe in global warming even though all the evidence disagrees.  The fact is global warming dissenters are ignored.  The media airs only stories in support of global warming; many people don’t even know that there is a legitimate opposition to global warming.  And the claim that the only people who disagree with global warming are paid by oil companies is unfounded, its mudslinging.  That claim is just as founded as the claim that all those in support of global warming are paid by the major environmental conservation companies.  

The global cooling scare can show where this is current scare will take us.  If you don’t remember this scare I’ll explain.  In 1974 scientists were convinced that the globe was cooling so fast that we would soon enter a new ice age.  The media portrayed it as fact, committees were put together and came out with the global cooling conclusion, a scientific consensus was called.  Ordinary people were scared that the world would end and what happened?  We now have global warming a 180 from the ice age we were supposed to enter.  Global warming is the exact same scare as global cooling.  You’d think that people would have acknowledged global climate cycles by now.  

6.  This claim has been made more popular recently; it’s called the preventative principle.  This may seem to be the end all global warming argument.  However this statement just conveys ignorance.  You, in your rich country in your house or apartment and on your computer, will not be affected by the precautionary principle.  These changes to alternate energy would apply worldwide, and it is a fact that these energy options are currently much more expensive than coal and oil.  Take Africa for example, a continent made up of mainly third world countries.  How do you expect the poorest people in the world to ignore their coal and gas resources in favor of very expensive alternate energies?  They can not afford it but the UN via the IPCC expects them to switch over.  Also the US alone spends over 4 billion dollars on global warming research, that money could be much better used to promote any number of charity programs.  

If you read my post or watched the video you should at least have been prompted to take a fresh look at global warming as an unproven theory.  It is no lie I do not believe in man-made global warming, my purpose in writing this is not to completely convince you global warming is false.  I wrote this to wake people up from blindly following the global warming crowd.  I urge you to look at global warming and take in consideration arguments made by scientists who oppose global warming.  Your time, vote, money, and liberties are being taken in the name of global warming.  

Start with these links:

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2Sci...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA235.htm...

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/

Answer 5

Note that even the guy who posted a long, paragraphless diatribe against climate change only presents evidence that current climate change may not be man-made.

The fact is that the climate is changing, and we need to start planning for what we do when that happens.  

Unfortunately, even the most fervent politicians and global warming advocates are focused on measures like limited greenhouse production.  This would have been very useful 150 years ago (assuming that the climate change is in fact, man-made in origin), but even if climate change is 100% anthropogenic in cause, trying to reduce the impact now is sort of like closing the barn doors after the horses have been leaving for barn for hundreds of years.

What is really needed is plans with what to do with hundreds of millions of refugees who currently live in coastal areas that will soon be flooded.

We need plans as to what to do if fishing grounds are depleted because ocean currents have altered, or farmlands become too arid to support their current crops.

Most western politicians are focused on greenhouse gas emisions not so much because it will be effective, but because it's something visible they can do to garner votes.

They may have the willpower to formulate the other plans, but they may be unwilling to do so because there is no way to make it popular or get votes from it.  Some of the plans may well have to include such actions as 'everyone in Florida is screwed' or 'abandon New York'.  No politician is going to forward those kinds of plans.

Totalitarian regimes like China wouldn't have to worry about such matters.  They can simply issue an edict, and it is done - no worry about political backlash from an unpopular decision.  So perhaps some good may come from Bush's much rumoured 'Emergency Measures' suspension of elections come 2008.

Answer 6

I'm with everything Mc said. Global warming is a natural process that has been going on for millions of years. Its like a roller coaster: there are warmer periods, and then there are cooler periods. I would suggest the book "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 years". It uncovers a lot.

Unfortunately, global warming has become a political "throw around" phrase that sounds good in speaches and might help them get elected.  Many politicians have no idea how it all works! This makes me mad because everywhere I look I see people preaching this "save the earth" idea. I say that it's all BS.

However, I would like to see more power come from Nuclear, wind, and hydroelectric sources...

...But I'm still gonna drive an all gas vehicle. None of this hybrid/electric c**p.

Sorry, I'm going off on a tangent. I'm done now.

ok, i'm back after reading the answer posted my haysoos2.

The costal regions will not be massively flooded! Since 1993 the TOPEX satelite has recorded a 4 inch drop in sea level near Tuvalu. (random place, but i'm doin a project on this)

Also, there is only a 1% chance of the sea level rising 3.5 feet or more. there is a 50% chance of it rising 1.5 feet or less. Take your pick.

Answer 7

THey dont need enough will power, they have brians telling htem that global warming is FAKE!

Answer 8

I don't think global warming is going to stop, simply because there are too many large companies who are revenue generating and economy supporting, and they will never get shut down. Perhaps, once its too late, they will develop cleaner methods of operating.

Answer 9

It's not like governments can just "throw a switch" to turn off a process in the Earth, that is probably a natural process anyway.  

Your question is like asking: Do the political leaders have the willpower to stop El Nino, or Hurricane Katrina, etc, etc,  No one has that kind of power, whether they have the "will" or not.

.

Answer 10

get real.

what makes you think political leaders have the interests of the public in mind in the first place

in 1898 kissinger said at a meeting in Copenhagen that the agenda demanded a decrease of 60% in the world population their objective is less public .how they hope to acheve that is another story.

secondly,scientists who get paid by politicians give reports that suit the political scenario,

to admit to Global warming  means to have to do something about it .

this means changing Industry ,changing lifestyles ,

damaging present profitable operations ,change cuts into profits ,new laws, new machinery,tighter controls on contaminants and methods of operations .all costly concepts ,all hurting the owners of big business and they pay the politicians

Global warming is far worse than the public is allowed to know .

global warming cannot be stopped

it can be slowed down but ar great cost

we are being lied to from all sides ,to keep us from going crazy and panicking

but we have been lied to for centuries anyway

those who touch the truth are ridiculed and propeganda  makes the truth seem like lies ,those who persist are removed (conspiracy theories )

so the masses live in darkness ,that is far cheaper ,and it wont make much difference in the end

politicians are not the leaders they are the mouthpieces of the leaders no more ,they are not in charge