Cause for Global Concern?

I agree with you It's a delima

i agree with you Lisa but what really whacks me out is the fact that people are actually incapable of understanding such delicate and important topics even if you unfold it bit-by-bit and give them a full explanation... what a bummer!

I agree with you. The US should set better standards. Enforcing them is quite another story. Look at how many beater cars there are. AS long as they can pass one inspection a year, it does not matter how they run the remainder of the year.

Germany is a little stricter, mostly on the US cars. But there are a lot of older BMW and Volvos in worse shape than some of those we Americans drive around in. So, i don't know who is worse. Or who is going to jump the bandwagon and go whole hog on this.

Americans talk a lot about the problem, but statistics prove that up until China became industrialized, we are by far the worst climate abusers in the world. We need to stop talking and start acting by using smaller cars and alternative energy sources other than biofuels. We need to start demanding fewer luxuries and start to live more simply. The biggest help to the condition of the Earth's health, would be to cut the increase in global population. Over-population is, and has been for many years, our greatest fundamental threat to sustainable life on Earth.

I agree with all of those proposals, if only our nation could act on them.

What highly concerns me is the FACT that politicians and political parties are turning a scientific issue into a political issue. The problems we are facing with emissions and the warming of our environment is an environmental problem that needs to be dealt with – it is not something to be debated by political parties.

It is definitely being exploited from a political angle. Any crisis situation always is. Since the government always needs to present an on-going outside enemy in order to control its people, (patriot act) this issue is falling right into their hands as well. I mean, I know there is a problem, (solar fires, etc.) but the exaggeration of human involvement with it is meant to make people willing to do anything they are told (endless taxes, regulations for private property, deprivation of amenities, etc.) in order to save themselves and the human race from certain death. It plays right into the Elitist plan for a "post industrial revolution" or rather the siphoning of our middle class treasury into the hands of the billionair private sectors. After all, the more civilized the society, the bigger the footprint, right? Better to cleverly impose poverty on us and keep us all at the level of peasantry and allow these owners to "consolidate the money" so that they can make even more wealth and have even more control.

Thanks for the well written article. I think we are going to do too little too late. At which time, the people who had no say in the matter will be the ones to suffer. The Powers that be, who could of done something, will hole up somewhere with plenty of food and say to hell with the rest of us.

Good article and information to think about. It will definitely be a problem in years to come if some changes don't begin now

Michelle- Glenn Beck is not a scientist in any sense of the word. he is a talking head. The founder of the weather channel is a meteorologist/businessman. Meteorologists are trained to believe that you cannot predict weather more than a couple weeks into the future. Nonetheless, many of them are now on the global warming wagon.

the people who really study this are the climatologists, several thousand of whom worked on the IPCC report. It represents therefore the current state of science. Is it a happy story that is pretty to believe? Hell no, it is bad news. but we should not base our acceptance or non-acceptance on how it makes us feel.

Lisa- you point out that it is tough for politicians to come to grips with this topic. why? Because it demands redoing our entire economy, and that is a mountain to climb.

But it is the only avenue we have got, unless we favor some science warlord taking over the country and making us do the right thing, like it or not. The real problem is not the politicians. the problem is that the public is acting out their conflicted feelings. We no longer wish to hear lies about global warming. But are we willing to make sacrifices? Not yet.
It will come. It may be too late to save our grandkids from a world of hurt, but there will come a day that US politicians fight each other to be the one who argues for the most sacrifice in the war against climate change. I hope it will not come too late.

You can find the picture I'm using as my icon by using Google, selecting Images and
entering The Great Ice Age. Here's a link to save time.

Great Lakes Formation

As recently as about 14,000 years ago much of North America was covered with glaciers. In fact the area where I live in western New York used to be under a glacier, then there was GLOBAL WARMING and by about 4,000 years ago the glacier had retreated to expose all of the great lakes and more.

So to those who say our current GLOBAL WARMING is ENTIRELY man made, I ask WHO was responsible for that last bit of GLOBAL WARMING that started about 14,000 years ago and gave me somewhere nice to live in western New York? There were no cars, no power plants, and not all that many people. So WHO was responsible? It must have been Bush and BIG OIL. I thought I would throw that in for all the hate America types who think our country is evil, a point of view I personally reject.

On the other hand, I recycle. I bring home every plastic or glass bottle I take to work. I don't pick up after others at work, but I do pick up after myself because I don't think we should needlessly trash the planet. Do you bring home your plastic water bottles from work and recycle them?

Is mankind contributing to GLOBAL WARMING? The answer is probably yes. The thing to be careful about here (and I think this is Glen Beck's point) is that the environmentalist crowd is using GLOBAL WARMING as a religion with Al Gore as the high priest.

Need proof of that? Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize over a 97 year old Polish woman who had personally saved Jewish children from the holocaust. Who was more deserving of a "Peace" prize, Al Gore or that woman?

Please take time to read the following brief article. The article can be found at

Opinion Journal Article


Not Nobel Winners
Some nominees for next year.

Sunday, October 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

In Olso Friday, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was not awarded to the Burmese monks whose defiance against, and brutalization at the hands of, the country's military junta in recent weeks captured the attention of the Free World.

The prize was also not awarded to Morgan Tsvangirai, Arthur Mutambara and other Zimbabwe opposition leaders who were arrested and in some cases beaten by police earlier this year while protesting peacefully against dictator Robert Mugabe.

Or to Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest in Vietnam arrested this year and sentenced to eight years in prison for helping the pro-democracy group Block 8406.

Or to Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Uyyouni, co-founders of the League of Demanders of Women's Right to Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia, who are waging a modest struggle with grand ambitions to secure basic rights for women in that Muslim country.

Or to Colombian President Àlvaro Uribe, who has fought tirelessly to end the violence wrought

Or to the people of Iraq, who bravely work to rebuild and reunite their country amid constant threats to themselves and their families from terrorists who deliberately target civilians.

Or to Presidents Viktor Yushchenko and Mikheil Saakashvili who, despite the efforts of the Kremlin to undermine their young states, stayed true to the spirit of the peaceful "color" revolutions they led in Ukraine and Georgia and showed that democracy can put down deep roots in Russia's backyard.

Or to Britain's Tony Blair, Ireland's Bertie Ahern and the voters of Northern Ireland, who in March were able to set aside decades of hatred to establish joint Catholic-Protestant rule in Northern Ireland.

Or to thousands of Chinese bloggers who run the risk of arrest by trying to bring uncensored information to their countrymen.

Or to scholar and activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim, jailed presidential candidate Ayman Nour and other democracy campaigners in Egypt.

Or, posthumously, to lawmakers Walid Eido, Pierre Gemayel, Antoine Ghanem, Rafik Hariri, George Hawi and Gibran Tueni; journalist Samir Kassir; and other Lebanese citizens who've been assassinated since 2005 for their efforts to free their country from Syrian control.

Or to the Reverend Phillip Buck; Pastor Chun Ki Won and his organization, Durihana; Tim Peters and his Helping Hands Korea; and Liberty in North Korea, who help North Korean refugees escape to safety in free nations.

These men and women put their own lives and livelihoods at risk by working to rid the world of violence and oppression. Let us hope they survive the coming year so that the Nobel Prize Committee might consider them for the 2008 award.

END OF ARTICLE – BACK TO ME


Al Gore, as high priest of the Hate Global Warming / Hate America crowd, got the award over many more deserving people because global warming is their religion and they are devoted to it.

So for me, it's not just politics, although there is a political component to it. I do care about global warming and I think mankind is contributing to it, but I also think there is a lot of "group think" going on in the scientific community. Don't under estimate the value of peer pressure here. Most scientists are tied to academic communities at the college or university level and the hate America sentiment is dangerously strong on campus today. In fact it is so strong that I personally worry about the future of our country.

That's it for me; I need to go put the stuff in my recycle boxes. Yes I have more than one recycle box. Do you?

Lisa M. This is an excellent article. It encouraged both trains of thought. I tend to believe that we better start treating our earth kindly and am willing to do so. Just switching to the energy efficient spiraled light bulbs helps a lot and there is a slight difference in the color of the light but it is well tolerated and for the most part we don't even notice. I have started looking for other ways to reduce my harm to the environment and will keep doing so. I am glad you wrote this article. This needs to be upfront in our minds constantly.

"So to those who say our current GLOBAL WARMING is ENTIRELY man made,"

who says that?

The IPCC says that global warming is primarily man made. They represent the current state of science and I have no need to argue that I am a better climatologist than they are.

Mike- Good for you on the recycling. Recycling is one of the easiest ways that we can reduce electricty use and thereby reduce carbon emissions.
Other than that I did not agree with anything you said, but it's a start.

Mike - Nobel Prizes are inherently political. Who is to say whether those people deserve a Nobel more than Gore? There are many people who disagree with the committee's decisions (for all of the Nobel prizes). So, despite your long and passionate post it's pretty much irrelevant to the discussion.

The IPCC again yesterday reprised its concerns about global warming. From a purely logical standpoint, think that over the last couple of hundred years we have exponentially increased population, carbon-based energy use, and CO2 emisisons (among a million other things). At the same time we have deforested and paved over a large amount of what was once plant-covered acreage (among other things). More CO2, less plants (that use CO2). So it logically follows that humankind could possibly contribute to a change in the eco-balance of our planet. So the next question is do we? Well, the IPCC and the vast majority of other climate scientists (who perhaps are more qualified to judge this than the Republican and Democratic speech-writers) seem to think so.

The global warming discussion, like all other discussions, is biased by our backgrounds, experiences, and concerns. The extreme views on both sides get a lot of press, but the bottom line is that there appears to be a big problem and burying our heads in the sand or simple partisan whining isn't like to address it.

Yes David, every word is true.

Unfortunately, humans need to do more than just recycle and change our light bulbs. Yes, these are great "feel good" things that we can do immediately for our environment. But in the great scheme of they do not make hardly any difference. As I said, they make the individual "feel good" about making a small difference. I am not discouraging this – what I am trying to point out is that "we" as a nation and as a global community need to make drastic changes in the way energy is produced and used. If this involves electing a "science warlord" I am all for it. Why should these changes be forced onto our children/grandchildren without us as parents and leaders setting examples for the younger population. Are we that greedy as a human population that we will not make concessions to preserve and save the world ecosystems?

I don't think any post is irrelevent. At least they have an opinion and are thinking about things. We have so many people in this world who, like cattle, just follow the herd and believe what the world leaders or their bosses tell them. I used to work for a solar electric company and we hoped that the government would jump on the band wagon and promote self sufficency. It was too unpopular at the time I was working there and too many people want to keep up with the Jones'. The Jones' should step up and be the non-consummer civil minded caretakers of the earth. Many people still want the statis symbol of having the biggest cars and the biggest televisions, the newest clothes and the stupidest biggest houses. I want to know where we are going to get enough water to take care of the greedy families. I suppose they are working on tecnology to get water from the ocean???The human race is about Greed and manipulation of money. I suppose people have evolved with greed inherent to the species. Watch out you little dandilions, people poison the weeds....

If prayer were my thing, I'd be praying big time. We are in such danger for our lives, and yet the more able someone is to do something about it, the greater the temptation is for that wealthy or powerful person to behave like a brat. Terrorism is nothing - Hell (if there were such a place) would be nothing - compared to what awaits us if we don't step up and be our own heroes.

Chris and David,

I've recently had some work done in my back yard and plan to have about 20 trees planted in the spring. I think that would be a good example of the whole think globally act locally thing. How's that for green?

I agree that the Nobel prizes are political, but they should not be. Most young people that see these awards being presented are not aware that those awards are in large part political, some might even say corrupt, or at least dishonest. Merely saying that's the way it is - just isn't good enough. If enough people pay attention to this perversion of what should have been a very serious decision and award, perhaps those with the power will start to behave more appropriately.

I grew up in a town where the corruption was rampant. People watched, spoke up, complained and things changed. Al Gore and the Nobel Prize committee should not get a pass on this repulsive perversion of that award. It should have gone to someone who truly deserved it. The Journal article mentioned several deserving people. There is too much suffering in the world to waste this award the way the Nobel people did.


Also, regarding the scientists, I really do believe there is significant group think and anti-American sentiment in that community. So on the one hand, I want to believe them, and I do to an extent. On the other hand I think they are probably determined to prove what they believe; i.e. my point about environmentalism being a religion for many people.


Lisa,

Changing light bulbs and recycling are more than feel good exercises. Enough small actions added together do collectively make a difference.

You are right in that real change probably does need to be made at the national and international level. Much of the reluctance in this country to go it alone is based on the fact that all that would do is significantly reduce the standard of living in the United States.

Communist China would love to see even stricter environmental controls in the United States. Such a change would drive those few manufacturing jobs that are left here out of the country. China would pick up the slack. I personally doubt the Communist Chinese government cares much about pollution.



Penashe,

I think solar has lots of potential. I would love to see that industry could come up with some sort of building material that could be used in the construction of commercial buildings. For example, there is a parking garage at one of our local hospitals that has some solar panels plastered on the side of the building. It looks OK, but it is obvious the panels were added on after construction.

If a panel existed that could be integrated into the design at the planning stage you could have an attractive and efficient building. Perhaps this is happening in places and I am just not aware of it.

At any rate, parking garages don't use that much power and have large flat areas exposed to the sun. I wonder if one could be designed with enough solar panels to be energy neutral. Once one was built, replication in other areas would (hopefully) bring the cost down enough to make it desirable to replicate in other locations.

This building methodology could easily be expanded to other commercial structures that have large flat areas. For this to work, these materials would need to be attractive and reliable.

"So to those who say our current GLOBAL WARMING is ENTIRELY man made,"

who says that?

where is the response to joseph's comment?

Personally, I perfer to err on the side of safety by doing something now in case the scientists know more about climate than the politicians and their ilk. I also prefer the term CLIMATE CHANGE rather than global warming. Most think warming sounds benign and we could all use a little more summer except for the deserts and who lives there anyway, right? Only, half the world's population. And if you thought, good riddence remember they are thinking the same about you. There will be less land mass-- there will be more war.

Truth is truth whether anyone believes it or not. Climate change means more Extreme weather of every kind: floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, Tsunamis, straight line winds, volcano eruptions etc. It also means that as the ice pack melts, the ocean levels rise. See maps of the changes in the coast lines of EVERY continent of the earth when this happens.

No, the USA will not be spared from this, nor will any other country. Phoenix already has 124 degree summer days. What if that was the median? What if Katrina was an average hurricane and there were several more levels? What if the big tornado in OKC in 1998 was just an average one and there were more levels of danger and damage? What if the Big Storm of _____ was an average occurance? Power outages for weeks with 18 below temperatures? These are the types of things that will happen if we don't make changes NOW.

What if life as we know it is about to change and we don't do the simple things that would make a difference? Do our children deserve to live in the world we are creating for them, with no choices then... the choices are being made now, by us every day.

Live simply now so that others may simply live then.

Someone on Gather wrote in the last few days that they wished we could all see the ice floes floating down from the North through the Northern seas and we would have no questions.

Joseph,

Sorry I skipped your comment. Maybe ENTIRELY was the wrong word, however, here is one of Chris' posts:

***************************************
The IPCC says that global warming is primarily man made. They represent the current state of science and I have no need to argue that I am a better climatologist than they are.
Chris W
**************************************

Assuming Chris is accurately representing their position, and I assume he is, the IPCC uses the term primarily. Perhaps they are correct, or perhaps they are somewhat correct. Some people say global warming is a hoax; I personally do not agree with that position, but my disagreement is more based on gut instinct than scientific analysis.

Additionally a couple of hundred years of records is not that long a time in geological terms so it is hard for me to believe these people have all the answers. Weather forcasts are seldom correct a week out, let alone a few numdred years out.

My point is that too many people both in the US and elsewhere in the world take this point to justifying focusing entirely on the United States. Some of the pictures I've seen of air polution in some Asian cities argue to the contrary.

This is a world level problem and the United States is frequently blamed for all of it. That just is not right.

Mike- we have around 5% of the global human population and we produce 25% of the carbon emissions. We deserve 25% of the blame, or if you note that our role is disproportionate to our population, maybe a bit more.

The poor planet....

I must admit, I'm on the fence as to whether there really is global warming or whether it is a natural change.....but it is true that we need to take better care of our world. IF we don't do it, no one else certainly will!

Hmm.., cut down a few billion acres of tress, black top a billion of those acres, put a few billion tons of pollutants into the air and water, expend billions of thermal units into the ambient temperature, and kill off billions of naturally occurring animals and microbes.

Nah, we couldn't be a primary source of global warming. All we've done is change the face of the planet.

Congrats on being featured on the Gather Home page, Lisa!!! Great article!

Mike, the USA is not actually being blamed by other nations for global warming. We are being blamed, quite appropriately, for refusing to participate in any efforts to combat it.

Hi Chris,

I can go with your 25% concept although I do wonder if that number may have decreased in the last several years since so many of our manufacturing facilities have been shut down. I'm just speculating that there may have been a drop - but I would have no idea as to how much of a drop.

Some of this should be self-correcting, although probably not fast enough, in that more people are looking for more fuel efficient vehicles and if gas prices hit $4 per gallon, which I expect by about February, that switch will accelerate. Government could help here by incentivizing the transition, but government seems broken.

It is really unfortunate we can't count on either major political party to solve anything in that none of the politicians at the national level seem capable of getting anything done besides sniping at the other party.

I know a lot of people hate him, but Gingrich, who I believe is one of the most insightful political thinkers of our time, has some fresh ideas to fix the paralysis in government. I doubt anyone will listen as a lot of what he is recommending would not benefit one party or the other.

I would be in favor of us, as in US, doing as much as we can independently, but I have very little faith in international institutions. Communist China and the way less than democratic Russia both want to destroy or at least marginalize us and are calling lots of shots at the UN and elsewhere.

Sorry to be drifting so far from the core topic, but I think the politics of this issue is so complicated that I personally have more faith in individuals making small differences than in government making a big difference.

I concur that China is a big big problem with the climate change puzzle. China has shown no interest so far in giving two shakes for anybody else's opinion- but----

In the long term I think that the course pf action with the best chance of success will be for the USA to take on a leadership role in combatting climate change. Then we will be in a position to exercise some pressure on China to follow our example, especially in concert with Europe. This will not happen in the next year, but expect some action in the next 2-4 year time frame.

Putin is a pig. The main problem with Russia is that Russians live there. It's not a communism thing, it's a cultural thing. They actually think that global warming is a good thing, because they will be able to drill for oil more easily in northern Siberia.

I dont have the answer to global warming. I do think if we all put forth more effort to preserve our natural resources by just using some common sense. We would have a better quality of life when we make the resources of earth last longer.

Autocracies have no incentive to help provide cleaner air--so we must do it for them
in a way that does not cross their borders. This can be done with air current
cleaners. IT is that simple and that complicated. AS long as it requires committees
to do something, it will not get done. I wrote about this during the $25,000,000
contest of Spring 07. Air direction can be slightly controlled. Thus, with filters
placed at specific confluences of moving air, this problem can be ameloriated.

By the way, excellent article Lisa

You did make a good point in the article.

Great article, Lisa :)

Right from Ist/2nd world war every coutry went on dominating looting, killing and spreading their colonies worldwide. The main cause is no man made disaster to environment or global warming but it seems that nobody wishes to blame the entire scientific community who in the name of research went on developing gadgets much more powerful to destroy the whole earth and secondary the Planes flying everyminute in the sky worldwide is directly causing harm to the ozone layer. Is the U.N.O. of any use and why terrorism cannot be stopped who carry destructable weapons and bombs let it be landmine or RDX who is responsible, according to me the security agencies,
security council who don't have guts to sop this menace. Firstly why we need Nuclear Bomb and continuously nucler test taking plance frequently world wide. why there is 100 percent surrendering nuclear as a subject which is causing 100 percent imbalanced ecological balance. It is high time the word "SCIENCE" has misused according to change of time and the education been imparted thereupon. Why the American's bombarded the Japanese at Nagasaki and Hiroshima, if at all if American's would hav not ventured out during 2nd world war and getting based at Pearl Harbour there could not have been attack from the Japanese, even though the world has not learnt any lesson just in the name of Security Council and limited countries having powers attacking Iraq and now Iran being targetted for Nuclear inspection trying to dominate the developing countries or underdeveloped countries will not help this total new method of Colonising in the name of Monitoring. What we have to see that Cent Percent any type of smoke emitting right from blast to take off in the sky has to be immediately stopped for the better of environment safety and cutting down of Forest and in the name of Developing into Concrete Jungle i.e. cities,roads,etc.. now we have to putforth natural sources and man power available at an unlimit cost, stopping of vehicles production which again does massive smoke emission. Overall you to have mentioned a good point in the article. We either should not blame USA,China,
Russia,Germany,England,Portuguese,Italy. All what we have seen in the World History
who went on colonising whom and who went on supporting whom for which parting of colonies were agreed, so gone are the days about wars and now what we have to see is no more colonising even an inch of any country but only thing is implementing in withdrawl of Science Subject in the World Educational Institution of lessons pertaining to any destructive things. What we have to see if Science Subject is there in it's place only Greenery and Environment subject should take place like Nuclear or any other Mechanical Gadgets which has spread it's tentacles, then only I feel we can save this Mother Earth and safe guard it's enviroment and Global Warming. JP

I will be curious to see how things turn out!