START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

17 Reasons Skeptics Should Promote Climate Change Solutions


Green Lifestyle  (tags: climate, ClimateChange, climate-change, climatechange, CO2emissions, environment, globalwarming, greenhousegases, science, research, nature, globalwarming, GoodNews, green )

Peter
- 2124 days ago - climateprogress.org
For those of us who are not scientists, action is what's important. We need not let the science debate put us off. Why? Because climate change is an issue where you don't have to agree on the problem to agree on the solutions.



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

. (0)
Sunday March 1, 2009, 8:18 pm
The problem with this is that we are promoting human arrogance in thinking we can affect climate change. Instead of wasting money and time on something we cannot control we should be spending both on reducing the pollutants we are putting into our atmosphere and preparing for climate change, whether it be warmer or cooler.
 

Dale Husband (124)
Monday March 2, 2009, 6:37 am
Ralph, such naysaying based on blind assumptions is pointless. It's not arrogance to note that six billion humans and their technology are capable of upsetting the delicate balance of nature. It's knowing how nature works. Clearly you do not, but you ASSUME you do. If you are saying we cannot change our ways to make us more in tune with our environment, that's the worst thing anyone can say, especially before we even make the atttempt.
 

Peter Mcevoy (41)
Monday March 2, 2009, 8:31 am
That is a good point, Dale. It's 6+ billion people and their technology is almost guaranteed to cause a change in the environment...


...unless we choose to take action.
 

Nathan Brown (165)
Monday March 2, 2009, 1:08 pm
Ralph, Dale, Peter,

I think we are all on the same team here. It seems we all agree that we should be reducing the pollutants we are putting into the environment.

Furthermore, most of the changes that would really make a difference for human induced climate change, like driving less, eating more local and organic, and living in a more energy efficient house, are things that will help with a whole host of environmental problems.

Do you agree Ralph?

Nathan
 

Peter Mcevoy (41)
Monday March 2, 2009, 5:00 pm
And societal problems, too.
 

Thomas L Robinson (52)
Tuesday March 3, 2009, 2:45 am

Great idea...in the blog. Kind of revolutionary in an evolutionary way.

Altering the Global Warming/Climate Change debate to the immediate advantages of 'greener' lifestyles and cultures.
 

Judy Cross (83)
Wednesday March 4, 2009, 11:16 am
Look at the assumptions here. Essentially it is "We must be doing something."
The fact that there is absolutely no connection between CO2 and climate escapes all those who are driven by the globalist nonsense.
"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring about?"
Maurice Strong, who has been stick-handling the Warmist scam since the early 1970s.

"Strong prefers to operate in the background. He, perhaps more than any other single person, is responsible for the development of a global agenda now being implemented throughout the world. Although various components of the global agenda are associated with an assortment of individuals and institutions, Maurice Strong is, or has been, the driving force behind them. It is essential that Americans come to know this man who has been entrusted with the task of "reforming" the U.N. - this man Maurice F. Strong."

Maurice Strong: The new guy in your future!
http://www.sovereignty.net/p/sd/strong.html

If CO2 were such a potent changer of climate...why is it that even though CO2 continues to go up, temperatures go down?

Take a look at the graph.http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3

Stop swallowing the koolaid!
 

Chris Otahal (511)
Friday March 6, 2009, 6:19 pm
"If CO2 were such a potent changer of climate...why is it that even though CO2 continues to go up, temperatures go down?"

This same denialist dogma has been answered MANY TIMES BEFORE - yet you continue to ask the same LAME question - a denialist broken record ...

Then you continue to quote "Friends of Science"...the denialist BLOG run by Tim Ball LMAO!!! You continue to promote the SAME graph over and over again ... ignoring the evidence...

and so, here is the reply to your question again ...and the debunking of your silly graph from your denilist site...

Friends of Science is run by none other than Tim Ball - one of the most prevelent denilists on the net ... and the lower trosophere data is totally unreliable data - the ONLY data set which show a "non-trend"...

Satellite show little to no warming in the troposphere - what it means

http://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm

and of course you simply ignore the FIVE other data sets all independently derived and ALL showing a RISING TREND IN TEMPRATURE over the last 30-years:

http://www.climate4you.com/images/AllCompared%20GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979.gif

and you IGNORE the 100 year trend:

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/wp-images/US_temps_2008.JPG

and you IGNORE the 130 year trend:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A.lrg.gif

So in other words you CHERRY PICK the ONE data set which fits your dogma (and repeate it over and over again) even though you know the data are unrelaible and are counter the VAST MAJORITY of the other FACTS ...

Also, do note that the data YOU JUST PROVIDED shows an INCREASE in temprature of 0.4 degrees between 1979 and 2009 - you only get a "negative trend" when you CHERRY PICK the time frame of 2002 -2009 - and it is quite clear that "negative trend" is "caused" by a SINGLE COOL YEAR in 2008 (one year of cool weather is called WEATHER not CLIMATE by the way)... Did climate change magically start in 2002 - no it has been going on over a much longer period of time ...

Since this has all been pointed out to you MANY TIMES, the only conclusion one can draw is that you are purposfully trying to decieve us and are providing dissinformation as part of some agenda (which from your other posts is obviously a pro-fossil fuel agenda) ...

 

Chris Otahal (511)
Friday March 6, 2009, 6:22 pm
Did global warming stop in 1998? (the answer is NO)

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm

Climate myths: Global warming stopped in 1998

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14527

Myth 2 Drop in monthly global temperature means global warming has stopped

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/guide/bigpicture/myth2.html
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.