Dear fellow Republicans, can we please start accepting the fact that climate change is real and humans are contributing to it? We dont have to view it as an insanely important issue but we need to acknowledge it at least. Can we do that?
I don't even understand why this is even a question that is answered by political thought.
And as science it is up for testing and questioning. Continuos questioning is the scientific method. It has not been proven as a fact, it has been accepted as a theory. As a theory science has a responsibility to question it.
Ok but that still does make the determination of truth a political process.
As a Liberal I just wanted to pop in and say thanks for posting this. Even if we disagree on social or fiscal policy it's really nice to see Conservatives agreeing that the health of our planet is an issue. Thank you.
For reals, the fact that some people think we have little to no impact on our environment is mind boggling to me. I'm glad my generation is being educated on the issue so we can work for change in the future.
Google maps cured deforestation. LOL The very idea that the entire globe must be subject to human control represents liberal naivete very well. No, 1970s liberals,,,,, we didn't have an " ice age" caused by evil capitalism and no, today's liberals, we're not about to rationally blame the earth's natural course of events on evil capitalism. WE CANNOT CONTROL THE EARTH. It's completely arrogant to think otherwise.
What about the insane amount of data provided by the scientific community on the issue? Never mind the overwhelming opinions of Climate Scientist, the raw data it's self clearly shows that the amount of Co2 and No2 in the air, (measured in parts per million) are step locked with the average global temperature. Not to mention that 7 out of the 8 hottest years in recorded within the past 10 years. How do you account for the pollution in major Chinese cities rendering life difficult to grow and even human existence to be a trouble. We can clearly see what we are doing. Sure an individual may not have a hard contribution to Climate Change; but 7.3 billion creating waste at an astonishing rate, that could and is doing the trick. Not all of it is man made don't get me wrong. Hell cows are one of the biggest issues but that's still kinda because the cow pop has been immensely increased to feed more humans so ya know....kinda still comes round to us.
Then please explain why the concentration of the isotope Carbon 13 in the atmosphere is decreasing.
I'm assuming you understand exactly what I'm talking about and why it is relevant to anthropogenic global warming, since if you don't, then you are not nearly informed enough on climate science to be rejecting the scientific consensus.
Not until liberals normalize their behavior regarding climate change.
Sure there is some impact, but I agree it's not a big deal
We can come to a comprimise. Climate change is a thing (of course), humans may play a *small* role in it, BUT, it should not give the government the ability to issue carbon taxes.
I agree completely on that.
Would you also agree that instead of placing taxes on industry, we should just plant trees to make up for the produced carbon?
"Small role" is a big understatement.
I think they overdo or actual influence.
We play a small role. You are delusional if we are the only cause for climate change.
I didn't say we are the only cause; I said our role in it is by no means small.
I said that. I think we contribute about 15-20% at most to climate change.
Youre falling for an exaggeration, Vayl.
The correct numbers are 74% at the minimum.
I think that is overblown. I think we are less than that.
I mean, those were the same people who said the world would. Be a giant ball of fire by 2013.
What are you even talking about?
74% is the most rediculous number ive heard in a while. You have 1 source, and its from an article called "Scientific American". Of course theyre gonna give you a huge percentage like that. Between 15% and 30% is a realistic percentage. 30% is a maximum.
Hes talking about al gore, who said New York would be under water by 2015.
Al Gore did not write the linked article, so I am very confused as to why EC said "These are the same people". Al Gore is also completely irrelevant and does not represent the scientific community, so I'm also confused as to why a politician is being brought into a scientific matter.
You also have no apparent basis whatsoever for your statistic that appears to be conjured up out of thin air.
Al Gore started the whole exaggeration.
I don't care what Al Gore did. He is not qualified. He is irrelevant.
No. Climate change exists, but it isn't caused by humans.
They contribute though.
A minor factor.
Not an excuse to limit our oil production and issue carbon taxes.
I agree on that
I used to be a denier. Then I did some research.