|
meatcleaver -> RE: Global Warming: The Pause That Refreshes? (5/18/2008 4:55:56 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cyberdude611
The problem I have about global warming is not the theory itself but the people who believe in it.
The problem I have is with the people who believe that it is a scientific fact. I think it goes against every prinicple that makes up the scientific method to say that anyone who questions global warming should be discredited and minimalized. Science is all about test, and retest, and retest, and retest, and so and so on... Theory after theory is tested over and over again under different conditions. And the results must be conclusive to arrive at any conclusion. And even when that conclusion is made, other scientists should be encouraged to test and retest and retest it again. That's how the scientific method works.
People who believe in man-made global warming however want to discredit and punish any scientist who questions the theory. That's no different than when the Catholic church banished Galileo for questioning scientific theories supported by the institutions.
Cyberdude, you obviously don't read what people write because I have never seen anyone say global warming is a scientific fact. Though I suspect you know that and ignore that little inconvenience.
What people like me show a concern about is the destruction of our habitat which is a fact, we can actually measure deforestation and increased desertification of the planet. We can actually measure the pollutants in the atomosphere. We know that over harvesting land and over fishing is having a devastating effect our vital resources. To some extent we know that the reasons why many species are on the verge of extinction. So without even considering human influence on the climate we know humans are destroying their own habitat and over harvesting resources our way of living relies on and we know it can't go on without serious consequences. Throw into the mix climate change which humans might or might not be influencing, then the most rational response would be to err on the side of caution and treat our habitat with the repect we would treat our own homes.
I suspect you don't shit in your living room and piss in your drinking water so why do we actually do the equivalent of that to our habitat?
We know why, as a society we are addicted to instant material gratification and we don't give a shit about the generations that come after us. We have to have our SUVs, our oversized refrigerators, our air conditioners apart for all the throw away crap we buy to make us feel good for a few seconds when we need a hit. The fact is the way we are consuming now, if everyone had the same standard of living as an average American we would need the resources of ten planet earths. The math don't add up.
|
|
|
|
