I see Global Warming as part of a greater problem, the systematic destruction of our planet by our own hand, via the waste that we pump into the environment. Solving one part will solve others, (IE: treating air born pollutants including CO2 before it hits the atmosphere).
Jim Davis wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott Stewart [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 1:37 PM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: SCIENCE! >> >> This goes back to one of my sticking points with the entire "Global >> Warming doesn't exist crowd." >> >> 1) We know that dumping chemicals into rivers and stream is bad, why? >> it >> kills fish. While we are not fish, we need many of the same things that >> fish need to survive. >> 2) We know that dumping chemicals into the air is bad, why? because it >> kills birds and trees, While we are neither we need many of the same >> things... >> etc.etc, >> > > Actually I would take exception to that line of argument as well - but for a > different reason. The "Global Warming" debate is about just that: global > warming or, more generally, climate change. > > There are several issues that often get snowballed into it that aren't truly > related. A few of the most common are pollution, ozone depletion and > resource management. Although these are often lumped together under the > umbrella of "being green" they are all very different things and I think > it's dangerous to lump them together. > > CO2 is not a "poisonous" gas (in and of itself) - although in some cases it > could be a predicate for individual disasters (some algae blooms and the > like may be partially blamed on unusual CO2 concentrations). We could, in > theory, address Global Warming (specifically CO2 emissions) without > addressing any pollution or reusable energy concerns (for example if we > sequestered just CO2 in order to become "Carbon Neutral" but maintained all > other practices as we are). By the same token we could address pollution > concerns (stop or filter dumping) without ever addressing other concerns and > so forth. > > So, in short, arguing (as I think you are) that we should worry about Global > warming and presenting clearly pollution-related reasons just isn't > convincing. Although the causes are often the same (burning "dirty" fuels) > the two problems really are separate. I just think it leaves open an > unnecessary vector for attack: namely that "greens" and "liberals" are just > anti-industry and don't really know why. > > Now, as I've said (over and over) many of the solutions being proposed > naturally address multiple points of concern (and, I think, this might be > your underlying point). Renewable power > (Solar/Wind/Geothermal/Hydroelectric/Ocean Current/Etc) has issues, but does > address Global Warming, pollution, resource management and, in some cases, > Ozone depletion. The various "scrubbers" and sequestration techniques being > proposed will also capture pollutants. "Zero footprint" tree farms and > lumber practices address several points as well. > > My biggest complaint levied against the anti-Global warming crowd is the > absolutely moronic opinion that because there's a question as to degree > nothing should be done. In other words because we don't know how much of an > effect we might have we should do nothing until we're "sure". Don't get me > wrong tho': this is just as stupid as those that believe that the current > evidence warrants drastic, civilization changing measures to prevent global > disaster. > > Either position is ridiculous on the face of it simply because of that > underlying point: investing in those solutions that address multiple > concerns is clearly a path to compromise and effectiveness. At this point > we might all agree that technologies that cut pollution, reduce resource > usage and preserve habitat are "good"... and the simple fact is that most of > them also address the concerns being raised about climate change. Not to > mention that most also reduce our dependence upon foreign resources and > increase our potential economic footprint. > > Jim Davis > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:283211 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
