Is Man-made Global Warming a problem?

[Banedon]

Simple yes or no answer.

[Chocolate Milk]

It's real.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

It's not quite the problem some would like us to believe it to be, but it's still a problem.

[salukifudd]

Without a doubt, a problem.

[Sammy Sofa]

It's not quite the problem some would like us to believe it to be, but it's still a problem.

 

Agreed.

[Balsa]

Very, very real.

[tkenm356]

Maybe a serious problem for my grandchildren, but until the Earth turns into a ball of fire, as long as I have an air conditioner I will continue to not give a crap

[Banedon]

Maybe a serious problem for my grandchildren, but until the Earth turns into a ball of fire, as long as I have an air conditioner I will continue to not give a crap

 

So did you vote yes or no? The question wasn't "Are you taking action against man made global warming?"...it was do you believe it's a problem?

[CubmanPi]

Simple yes or no answer.

http://static.flickr.com/31/51999805_b811fe653d_m.jpg

If you were a hotdog, would you eat yourself? I would. I'd smother myself with mustard. I'd be delicious.

 

Sorry, it came to mind with the wording and I couldn't resist. I voted yes. Though I don't think it's a beast that can be stopped or even slowed by better gas mileage in SUVs or stricter emissions standards, or anything for that matter.

 

I also wonder if the shrinking of Mars's ice caps over the last three Martian summers (last six Earth years) means that Martians are driving too many SUVs too. They probably haven't even seen Al Gore's movie.

 

EDIT - that link is a little old, so the trend dates back to about '99 or so. Don't know if the information is still relevant or not, but an interesting coincidence to ponder nonetheless.

[Mizzou]

How can anyone say that it's not?

[tkenm356]

Maybe a serious problem for my grandchildren, but until the Earth turns into a ball of fire, as long as I have an air conditioner I will continue to not give a crap

 

So did you vote yes or no? The question wasn't "Are you taking action against man made global warming?"...it was do you believe it's a problem?

 

I voted no

[Vinestal]

No

Its an issue that is completely made up by liberal tree huggers. There are as many scientist that dont believe it is a problem as there is that do. Liberals cry louder though and its in alot of people's nature to believe that the sky is falling when they hear someone say it that it is without researching the situation. Since the media is largely controled by the liberals global warming is all people hear.

[ConstableRabbit]

No, I'm not truly convinced yet. It hasn't reached the level of Darwinism yet, really, and it's become a heavily political movement, which makes me (unfairly or not) even more skeptical. However, I haven't ruled it out, and it's not like I don't have respect for people who do believe that it's a problem.

 

That being said, even if it is, I really don't see what we, as Americans, can do about it. Do we lower production while China and India continue to pollute at astronomical rates (and they will be even larger polluters in the coming years) based on something that has not been completely accepted in the scientific community and end up losing ground economically? I don't think so. Not yet, anyway.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It's not quite the problem some would like us to believe it to be, but it's still a problem.

 

Well said.

[Chocolate Milk]

No

Its an issue that is completely made up by liberal tree huggers. There are as many scientist that dont believe it is a problem as there is that do. Liberals cry louder though and its in alot of people's nature to believe that the sky is falling when they hear someone say it that it is without researching the situation. Since the media is largely controled by the liberals global warming is all people hear.

really?

[CubFanPhilly]

Global Warming is a problem. IMO a very minor problem compared to nuclear proliferation.

 

The human factor in warming is debatable, but reduction of carbon emissions is a good and reasonable goal for many reasons other than climate change (e.g., lowering dependence on foreign oil, reduction of pollution).

[Banedon]

I have to admit, I'm a little amazed at how close this poll is.

[CubmanPi]

Global Warming is a problem. IMO a very minor problem compared to nuclear proliferation.

 

The human factor in warming is debatable, but reduction of carbon emissions is a good and reasonable goal for many reasons other than climate change (e.g., lowering dependence on foreign oil, reduction of pollution).

That right there is the first thing I'd like to see on our energy agenda's list of motives. The human impact on global warming is at the very least debatable, but the river of money flowing through that region is a much more immediate and pressing concern. I would love for more money to get diverted from global warming research and put into alternate energy development.

 

/voted yes in the poll

[Balsa]

No, I'm not truly convinced yet. It hasn't reached the level of Darwinism yet, really, and it's become a heavily political movement, which makes me (unfairly or not) even more skeptical. However, I haven't ruled it out, and it's not like I don't have respect for people who do believe that it's a problem.

 

That being said, even if it is, I really don't see what we, as Americans, can do about it. Do we lower production while China and India continue to pollute at astronomical rates (and they will be even larger polluters in the coming years) based on something that has not been completely accepted in the scientific community and end up losing ground economically? I don't think so. Not yet, anyway.

Then you obviously haven't been looking. The US is number one in CO2 emissions both total and per capita of any nation in the world.

[CubinNY]

I have to admit, I'm a little amazed at how close this poll is.

 

Me too, given how little debate there really is in the scientific community.

 

Frickin liberal scientists :)

[soccer10k]

I have to admit, I'm a little amazed at how close this poll is.

 

I agree. I don't see how you can really say that it isn't a problem. Somebody may not think that man-made global warming is a big problem but it's still a problem.

[ConstableRabbit]

No, I'm not truly convinced yet. It hasn't reached the level of Darwinism yet, really, and it's become a heavily political movement, which makes me (unfairly or not) even more skeptical. However, I haven't ruled it out, and it's not like I don't have respect for people who do believe that it's a problem.

 

That being said, even if it is, I really don't see what we, as Americans, can do about it. Do we lower production while China and India continue to pollute at astronomical rates (and they will be even larger polluters in the coming years) based on something that has not been completely accepted in the scientific community and end up losing ground economically? I don't think so. Not yet, anyway.

Then you obviously haven't been looking. The US is number one in CO2 emissions both total and per capita of any nation in the world.

 

Not for long.

[Balsa]

No, I'm not truly convinced yet. It hasn't reached the level of Darwinism yet, really, and it's become a heavily political movement, which makes me (unfairly or not) even more skeptical. However, I haven't ruled it out, and it's not like I don't have respect for people who do believe that it's a problem.

 

That being said, even if it is, I really don't see what we, as Americans, can do about it. Do we lower production while China and India continue to pollute at astronomical rates (and they will be even larger polluters in the coming years) based on something that has not been completely accepted in the scientific community and end up losing ground economically? I don't think so. Not yet, anyway.

Then you obviously haven't been looking. The US is number one in CO2 emissions both total and per capita of any nation in the world.

 

Not for long.

Whatever. We're in a huge position to make a difference here, and blaming other countries is just pathetic.

[Rob]

I've seen most of the relevant science, and my father works closely with the issue. While I do think liberals abuse this as a hot-button issue, it is nevertheless an issue. The human impact of global warming is almost insignificant, especially compared to changes in orbital rotation. However, it is better to be safe than sorry in the long run. Making new products more eco-friendly would be wonderful, but forcing old products to meet new emissions standards would be counter-productive by merely making energy less affordable.

[ConstableRabbit]

No, I'm not truly convinced yet. It hasn't reached the level of Darwinism yet, really, and it's become a heavily political movement, which makes me (unfairly or not) even more skeptical. However, I haven't ruled it out, and it's not like I don't have respect for people who do believe that it's a problem.

 

That being said, even if it is, I really don't see what we, as Americans, can do about it. Do we lower production while China and India continue to pollute at astronomical rates (and they will be even larger polluters in the coming years) based on something that has not been completely accepted in the scientific community and end up losing ground economically? I don't think so. Not yet, anyway.

Then you obviously haven't been looking. The US is number one in CO2 emissions both total and per capita of any nation in the world.

 

Not for long.

Whatever. We're in a huge position to make a difference here, and blaming other countries is just pathetic.

 

That's not what I was doing. I'm just saying, China and India are not going to sacrifice their economic future for the sake of global warming.

 

We won't be able to lower our air pollution over night. I'm saying by the time we actually end up lowering it, we're really not going to be the problem. Once they get large segments of their populations out of poverty (which will happen in the next 5-10 years) and people start buying cars, we're going to have big problems on our hands if, indeed, air pollution is the main factor in global warming. On top of that, we will probably have cut production by that time as a result of increased regulations (hopefully not) while China and India will have been able to reign free.