The thing is, reduced consumption, increased efficiency and renewable energy are all valuable goals in themselves whether or not the planet is warming. They just become that much MORE valuable if it is, but when people insist that it's not and we should therefore dismiss suggestions we reduce consumption, increase efficiency and seek clean renewable energy, it raises the question of what agenda of theirs makes those things so objectionable irrespective of global temperatures.
Switching to renewable energy sources, reducing or eliminating our dependency on oil and the creation of low, zero or even beneficial emissions (like hydrogen-cell cars, which produce only water as their waste product), not to mention cleaning up air quality, is a tremendously positive outcome irrespective of it's related to us microwaving the planet or not.
BBC - What Happened to Global Warming?
- 10/10/2009 05:07:19 PM
373 Views
This fits nicely with the interview of Giora Shaviv I posted on the old wotmania board
- 10/10/2009 05:40:25 PM
241 Views
I love how even when people factor in cosmic rays the naysayers reject findings they dislike.
- 10/10/2009 06:42:20 PM
242 Views
Agreed
- 11/10/2009 12:42:13 AM
253 Views
It's really simple: If the models are wong, it's a good idea; if they're right, an essential one.
- 11/10/2009 08:35:17 PM
201 Views
AGW is total BS.....no evidence to support this, but.....
- 11/10/2009 02:56:55 AM
222 Views
Odd how it only gets political when politicians involve themselves.
- 11/10/2009 08:39:51 PM
222 Views
A broad "consensus" with no direct evidence to support their conclusions.....
- 12/10/2009 12:57:41 AM
223 Views
Yes we could wait until 2050 and then go to China and say never mind we want the world back.
- 12/10/2009 04:36:48 AM
221 Views
What I love is that none of their damned models predicted it.
- 11/10/2009 01:16:15 AM
250 Views
I'm curious now... did you actually look at any of said models? *NM*
- 14/10/2009 03:50:37 PM
87 Views