What can our nation do in order to stop global warming?

Question

Post opinions here.

Answer 1

If you’re talking about the U.S. I’m sure we could blame it on China or India then this whole notion  of global warming would go away.

Answer 2

To stop global warming, on our part in the US, we must do several things.  For example, deporting illegal aliens is the most obvious starting point.  This would need to be followed by committing Britney Spears to a rehab facility and canceling all "reality" shows (American Idol, Survivor, etc.). Of course for any true impact to be noticed Al Gore must be put on a plane to Antarctica never to return.  Tough measures to be taken for sure but only when we agree to make these hard choices can we reap the benefits.  Oh yeah, let's not forget that tipping must be eliminated from our society as well.

Answer 3

The only thing that they can do is to

launch programs that enables residents

to help minimize the effects of global warming..

Even if the government launch a lot of programs..

without the cooperation of the other members of the society..

it's just a waste of time & effort..

Answer 4

Absolutely nothing. The only proposed global warming mitigation effort is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The Vostok ice core data (see reference) shows conclusively that temperatures rise and fall in advance of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. There are a number of, shall we say, mathematically challenged, that will respond with the argument that "CO2 is both a cause and effect". This rebuttal is based on the theory that there is a positive feedback mechanism where increased temperature results in oceanic outgassing of CO2 which increases temperature which increases outgassing, etc.

However, the abrupt reduction of global temperatures without a reduction in atmospheric CO2 concentration in every one of the four temperature cycles shown in the Vostok data, without exception, belies the notion of a positive feedback mechanism. That is, if CO2 concentration is a cause of any kind, and specifically a cause through positive feedback, then to have temperatures plunge in the presence of the highest levels of CO2 is mathematically unsupportable. Further, if one analyzes the Vostok data in light of the known solubility of CO2 in sea water, the relationship is undeniable and the exponential character required by a positive feedback mechanism completely absent.

There are other individuals who will respond to this with the "argument" that this time it's different. What they are really saying is that you should put aside science in a scientific debate and simply acquiesce to their conclusions no matter how unsupportable. Somehow, they want you to believe that a multi-billion year old solar system has suddenly changed the local laws of physics just so that they won't be wrong.

Nature, in the form of the Vostok data, has spoken. And it says that global temperatures have never, in 450,000 years, been affected by atmospheric CO2 concentrations. AGW proponents have also spoken. They say that nature lies.

Answer 5

Defund UN agenda driven science.

Answer 6

At this point we can not stop global warming, we can only reduce it's effects.

Answer 7

don't do anything, stop doing

eg stop subsidies to fossil fuel coprorations http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/11...

Answer 8

Mostly reduce the use of fossil fuels by using nuclear, solar, wind, and biofuels.  And conserving energy.  Develop and use electric or hydrogen powered vehicles for transportation, getting the electricity from the above sources.

Here's a detailed and affordable plan, worked out by a team of hundreds of scientists and economists.  It won't stop global warming, but it will reduce it to where we can cope with the remaining effects.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg3.h...

Answer 9

take away all people freedoms

Answer 10

Which nation is this? Its a big big world darling

Answer 11

Get rid of Al Gore. Or vote democrat.