Shouldn't the Global Warming category be under Politics & Government?

Question

It just doesn't seem to fit under Environment. What does global warming have to do with the environment?

Answer 1

Yes, global warming is a political issue because the whole point of it is to change the way countries function without paying attention to the body of science that proves that global warming is not caused by man.

It should definitely be under Politics and Government.

Answer 2

IT IS NOT TRUE

I wrote a 29 minute speech on why it is false... we as humans do not cause it

EXTRACT:

--Email [e-mail] for the whole thing--

I.  For a long time people have been looking through glasses that have foggy lenses of deception regarding global warming.  In the next couple of minutes I intend to show you a more accurate eye chart and update your prescription.

A. My point for this response is to try and persuade you to see the light at the end of the dirty tunnel of humanities’ lies.

II.  Global Warming is the most debatable topic that was probably ever around.  You need to know this information.  If you don’t educate yourself properly on this topic you will live the rest of your life in fear of something that doesn’t exist.

A.  Global Warming is a natural cycle.  Everything about it is natural.  Carbon dioxide levels vary throughout time.  Humans can make little or no impact on the environment.

1.  In reality….  There is about one person who doesn’t believe in Global Warming to two people who do.  This means that only 60% of the world believes in global warming.  My goal by the end of this response is to have the 60% be persuaded that they do not believe in the accurate thing.  With the following facts, I am 100% sure that this goal is possible and will be achieved.

2.  Al Gore stated this quote in his movie “…The 10 hottest years ever recorded were within 15 years of today.”  Now this point is valid and true, but we have not been measuring the temperature or anything since the early nineteen hundreds.  Can we go down and see how the polar ice caps were doing in the early 1800’s?  We can not do that because temperature was not recorded.  You may say that they guessed using carbon dioxide levels, but whose to say that they are right?  I heard that scientific measures were not always accurate because they took a hundred year old log and did some carbon 14 testing on it.  Scientists thought that it was thousands of years old.  It was later proved to be younger after more tests were ran.  Who’s to say that our method of discovering weather is right?   We have been measuring temperature for only a short period of time.  Earth right now is in a heating process.  Thousands of years ago we were cooling which is when we had an Ice Age.  Now we are doing the opposite and are starting to warm up before cooling again. Look at this political cartoon.  What is one thing that you notice?  I notice it being freezing then gradually getting warmer. As my next point is about to prove, we have no effect on the environment no matter what we do.

3.  In 1990 a volcano in the Philippines erupted violently.  It was by far one of the biggest explosions of the century.  We all have read about how volcanoes let off carbon dioxide, but did you know this… When the volcano erupted, it put more carbon dioxide in the air than all of humanity has ever produced…. More than humans have made since the creation of time.  All in just a matter of hours. Look at this picture (not included).  See all of this carbon dioxide being put into the air?  While, with all of this there was no temperature increase or decrease at all… just some carbon dioxide level changes, but nothing major.  If volcanoes put off this much carbon dioxide with no effect, then how could we be doing this?  When all this happened, then how could you be persuaded that humans who produce fractions of that amount could impact the environment in fractions of the time?  Humans if we tried could not severely impact the environment.  It is just too big.  Even if we are letting some off, plants and other natural recyclers of Carbon Dioxide are just transforming them to oxygen.

4.  During World War II, we dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan.  We spilled tons of harmful green house gasses into Mother Nature.  This includes radiation, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide.  After all of that happened, again there was no effect to the environment that was found.  Hiroshima has been having radiation problems still, but there is no significant temperature problem.  Nothing humans do can severely change our environment.  We only occupy about 50% of the globe.  The other 50% is the ocean, ice caps, and land that are not suitable for humans.  How could two nuclear bombs not have an impact on the environment, but changing a light bulb in your house to fluorescent can save the environment?  It is just impossible that we could have an impact.  

5.  Another point is that if you look in your text book, I promise you that you will find these words… “When Washington was marching his troops, it was bitterly cold outside” Bitterly cold means freezing.  I know that they didn’t have supplies but Virginia in the summer (which is when they fought) is warm.  As you can see by these charts, it was 106 degrees outside in the summer.  This is without humidity too.  Now when we look at this chart it shows us that the battle was fought in Yorktown.  There isn‘t much of a distance between Yorktown and Richmond, were this was recorded.  How was it bitterly cold a few hundred years ago when now it is normal?  The conclusion is that it is a natural cycle.  The cycle changes every several hundred years.  It was cold then, and now it is slowly warming up.  We have nothing to do with it.  This is perfectly natural for our environment to do.  We would like to believe that humans are the dominate species.  Have we ever thought to wonder if what we believe in is caused by nature?

6.  One of the most important factual information is still on our planet.  Greenland is one of the most misunderstood places around.  People like to believe that the reason that it got it’s name is because the settlers didn’t want people to move there so they called an icy land Greenland so that settlers would move their instead of Iceland were it really was green..  After I saw a show on the discovery channel,  I concluded that it was actually green.  When the first settlers went there,  they dined on grapes and cows.  I don’t think that I am mistaken, but how could a cow live on an icy land with nobody to feed it.  Grapes grow in warm environments which is not ice.  Greenland fits that exact description.  Also as you can see on this picture, there is still some green left in it.  All of it was green once, which proves that it once was green and now it is ice because of the natural cycle, it is starting to freeze.  Now Greenland is melting to start the process all over again.  In a few hundred years, Greenland will begin to freeze.

NOTE TO READER: FOR POINT 67-8 IT MAKES NO SENCE UNLESS POWERPOINT IS VISIBLE… THANKS!

7.  Ok…  Phoenix is known as a hot dry desert place.  You think that it keeps getting hotter and hotter here each summer.  Take a look at this display on the screens.  As you can see, during the day the sun is radiating energy to a large city… lets call it Phoenix.  It does this all day until the sun starts to go down.  As you can see now,  the buildings are built up with radiation while the desert area barely got any radiation build up.  Now it is night and as you can see the buildings are radiating heat forming a heat bubble.  Now in Phoenix at night it is around 95 degrees.  That is because of the buildings radiating.  We are made of concrete and steel so we absorb heat.  Take a look over at the desert.  See how the temperature there is lower?  This is because it is not trapped in the heat bubble of radiation.

8.Many people relate global warming with long citywide droughts.  Like in Phoenix, we are in a drought.  There are many reasons why this is not caused by us. Have you ever watched the news and heard the following phrase “… and people of Chandler are getting pelted by rain, many individuals are putting up sand bags to protect their homes…?”  What this is saying is that small little cities are getting poured on.  Look at the power point and see why,  The big glob in the center is called Phoenix, Glendale, and Peoria.  Ok now imagine that we are in the middle of a storm.  The red indicates heavy rain and the yellow indicates moderate rain.  As you can see from this animation that I made,  the storm is going around Phoenix.  We are a giant blob and the storm is just simply avoiding us.  Smaller cities like Chandler and Mesa are being pelted by this continuous down pour.  So in smaller cities they may say, “We got rained on the most we ever have” and the airport were they measure the amount of rain says there were only a few drops of rain.  This proves that we did not cause the drought by carbon dioxide, but we did it by industrializing.  

9.  Global Warming is also just a political trap.  Who are the only ones who want to try and do something about global warming besides tree huggers?  Politicians do.  When somebody is running for office this makes a better point, I am going to save the world!  Who would you rather vote for… Mr. Free Dental Insurance or Mr. I am Going To Save The Planet From Destruction!  The choice is pretty clear.  Which, that was Al Gore’s main election motto.  They want you to vote for them do they are scamming you.  Al Gore doesn’t believe in global warming himself!  When he was running for elections, he rented private jets which emit 800 pounds of CO2 per passenger instead of commercial for 88 pounds of CO2 per passenger.  He didn’t even own a private jet either; he flew this way for 20 trips.  If he would have flown on a commercial plane he would have saved 14240 pounds from the environment.

III.  Global Warming is all natural.  We do not have an effect on it.  If we tried there is nothing that we could do that would impact our society.

1.  We have nothing to do with what is going on in the world.  There is no reason that just because our planet is warming, we are to blame.  This has happened before and will be continuing to happen for the rest of the history of

Answer 3

Global Warming is a LIE and propagated by the Left. There calculations say that people should be dieing from CO2. We are not because the plants need the CO2 as much as U need oxygen.The green house gas not there . The plants have taken care of the CO2. The methane is just not there it was just the Left's bad calculation.

Answer 4

Yes, or maybe Religion & Spirituality.  Global Warming is a reincarnation of the Communist G-d that failed, for anyone old enough to remember.  You think it's a coincidence that in their minds the Industrial Revolution was the CO2 event that started all our problems in life?  For them AGW is the first cause of all the bad things in the world.

It's not the end of the world, it's just the end of the AGW believers.

Dr. Blob - the fantasy is that AGW is anything important, and that humans "drive" climate change.

Answer 5

OK it's very obvious that this issue has a lot of people concerned. If the clouds of pollution didn't shield us it would be much worse apparently.

How many people actually live in a food growing environment?

If most are in the city, their experience of collecting food from the supermarket may effect the way they think.

The Earth IS warming up-That's a fact. Of course the Earth has always gone through many changes, but this present one is much much faster and it's speed is undoubtedly due largely to HUMAN activity.

Consider;- the uses of land to grow 'products' for human comfort. eg every human body on earth, clothed just for a start. And many have cupboards full of extra cloths.

then think of BEDS, houses, all furniture multiplied by Millions, and Billions, public buildings, office furniture, Oh dear, Earth's particles turned to human seemingly needs (often greeds, objects of lifestyles) And tell people they are entitled to take from the Earth whatever their little hearts desire. (capitolism has done such a wonderful job on us all.)

Question is, is there enough left for other life forms??? The melting ice in the poles is proof of the pending disaster. (See utube, ) Polar Bears swimming to find no resting place,

Politics maybe a better category but only if a Ministry of Peace is established that can deal with the human impact, and begin to address it with the goodness in the human heart for the lives of all the lives in our natural world.

Spiders, whales, sharks, frogs, bees, and the list goes on.

Patriarchy step aside, our descendants can take no more of your insane rantings. The truth is clear, weather is here  . . to show us the path home to ourselves, our real; nature selves, and to abandon this artificial illusion of safe and warm. We can learn another way a new standard. Consuming stay silent and die. Others respond, let go and be one finding sollutions to this our family. THE HUMAN FAMILY.  

Categories are developing along with our diverse and harmonious consciousness'

janet.

Answer 6

yes and No,

yes, because the Government can introduce policies, police it and provide incentives.

No, as it is everybodyś concern and as the issues are major in nature it is required under the stated heading to capture it all.  This is a big issue and needs to be visible, we all  can make a difference

Answer 7

Yes, "Politics & Government"  would be more appropriate than "Enviornment."   I wonder if "Psychology" would be the best category because the enviornmentalists will not accept any compromise from a credible producer of energy.   But, I feel the politics classification will prove right as the sudden improvement in the enviornmental metrics begin on the day the Democrats have a strong election outcome.  Big Media keep on rollin'.   Tass Agency was never as strong as our news system.  Sure, its  a political vehicle.

Answer 8

Yes because it is a new Ideology to control and milk the wealth of the people .

Answer 9

Yes, it has become politicised but I wouldn't blame Gore for that...

The science of GW has everything to do with the environment by definition.

The response to GW may be better discussed in P&G.

The skeptical arguments perhaps would be best in religion and spirituality: The skeptics rarely present evidence for their opinions. Opinion without evidence is faith. Proponents nearly always give a factual basis and/or links to the facts supporting their arguments: This is science.

(Example: Johnnie with his "The green house gas not there" - there are many, many sources that say that GHGs are there (see below) - where is his substantiation for such a claim? None given. Never is: Faith.)

Answer 10

No doubt that Global Warming has become politicized, but it's not a political issue - it's one of science.  I don't believe that losing freedom and stopping AGW are synonymous.  It's the right that's propagated this myth.  

So the govt. makes the auto manufacturers become more fuel efficient, or switch to alternative energy.   They move our country towards using green energy instead of fossil fuels.  We reduce our dependence on foreign oil and still get to drive our hummers - they just need to get 50 miles to the gallon :).

Answer 11

It depends on where people take the discussion.  For some people it is a religion, but then for some people there politics is their religion.  

Political Correctness has seemed to blur the lines of alot of things.

Answer 12

Early on, that's exactly where these arguments took place.  They opened this category here to get it OUT of the politics section (it was interfering with OTHER topics of politics).  

...and mythology and folklore, or religion would be a more appropriate category.

Answer 13

Either that or "mythology and religion"

Answer 14

Cmplnts? Get N Line: "IT IS NOT TRUE"

1. "only 60%" this figure would seem to be fiction the figure is more like this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7010...

2. Gosh C-14 testing,you don't supply a link or name the scientist, possibly because he/she might be embarrassed, because any real scientist would know one of the limitations of c-14 is testing modern industrial era items.

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

3. "again with volcanoes", the figures on Co2 emissions from humans vs volcanoes are widely available

volcanoes = ~240 MILLION

Human = ~27 BILLION

That would seem to be a little more released by humans.

4. Nuclear bombs had no effect really

did you know that the weapons tests of the 55-63 increased the level of c-14 so much that it is used to age teeth of bodies as long as the person was born after 1943.

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

5. pointless

6. "Greenland" again talk of the Vikings and how warm it was. The fact is the vikings on lived in the very southwest corner of Greenland around the same areas as the population still live and grow some food and raise animals today, The glacial ice didn't disappear during this time as the glaciers of Greenland are tens of thousands of years old. While changing climate had an effect they had a number of other problem as well including conflict with the Inuit, a marked drop in trade with Norway and depletion of the few natural resources, like trees. That in the end forced them to leave.

7. 8. 9. same old same old!

Answer 15

yep thanks to Al Gore it has become politicized which is never good. if we start spending money on this hoax and getting restrictions slapped on our lives then people SHOULD revolt this is America were talking about.

Answer 16

Yes it should becasue global warming is politics and how freedoms will be taken away from us becasue of this "issue".

Answer 17

No, that's ridiculous.

Global warming SHOULD be in the Environment section, as it will cause the ultimate melting of the polar icecaps and destroy the environment [global flooding, causing animals to lose their homes, also because cutting down of trees contributes to global warming.].

Anyway, Global Warming IS Climate change, it's just more specific to WARMING not change.

And maybe the environment catagory should be a sub catagory for politics [like, it would be a catagory AND a sub catagory, and the sub catagories in Environment would be sub sub catagories.]

Answer 18

Religion & Spirituality

Is a more appropriate category.  Since,  GW advocates are known as Believers and skeptics are called Deniers.

Answer 19

That's why I started a blog on ENERGY--- and the political issues surrounding it:

http://neighborsgo.com/blog/boatman2

Answer 20

No, it belongs under science where it used to be.

The denial of it belongs under politics, conspiracy theories, fantasy...

It has everything to do with the environment.  

It's a symptom of a larger problem.