Do any republicans believe in global warming?

I'm surprised no one has responded yet.....

Oh wait, I just did!

I'm not a Republican but I'll get this ball rolling.....

I'm not a climatologist, I only play one on TV, but I believe that global warming could be due to natural AND man-made causes!! How's that for middle of the road thinking!!!

FACT: The Earth is getting warmer and CO2 levels are increasing.

There has always been volcano activity on Earth, some big volcanoes are becoming active again, like the one in the Congo, Mt. St. Helens almost 60-70 current active volcanoes. They spew out ALOT of sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide. This could cause a rise in CO2.

Man contributes due to fossil fuel burning, clearing the rain forest, and poor land management (removing ALL trees when putting up a housing development).

What urkes me is when people totally turn a blind eye to man's contribution to global warming. Just plain ignorant in my mind.

 

I suspect that some fundamentalists actually support global warming because, not unlike a nihilistic death cult, they look forward to global apocalypse. Some of them desperately want to prove their naysayers wrong and rise from the dead or vanish or follow Jesus into battle or whatever, right in front of their detractors' eyes, and some may even stoop to reckless means to try to bring about the end of the world during their lifetimes.

Of course there are other Christians, even some conservative ones I suspect, that take seriously what they believe is a religiously-proscribed role as stewards of the Earth, and who are quite willing to patiently sit back and let their Savior return on His own timetable.

Is their anyone left in the Republican Party at this point who is not part of Religious Right? Judging from those latest poll numbers, not many, that's for sure.

 

Republican here.

Do I believe in global warming? Well, that depends on what you mean by “believe.”
I neither chant the unbeliever mantra nor drink the cool-aid.

Do I believe global temperatures are rising? Yes. If that is what all scientist are saying, anyone would be a fool to say otherwise . . . unless they have superior knowledge which escapes all the scientists . . . and, unfortunately, like all of you, I do not possess that superior knowledge.

Do I believe it is a man-made phenomenon? I neither believe or disbelieve. If all the scientists can't agree, who am I to take sides? We human beings, as all knowing masters of our universe, are not far removed from our not so distant ancestors who would freak-out when they witnessed a total solar eclipse. I witnessed the August 1999 total solar eclipse while vacationing in Germany. It was the most beautiful display of nature I have ever seen. Unfortunately we still have humans who freak-out over things they don't understand.

Ozone Hole! :blink: :huh:
Are you freaked-out?
Do you believe?
Is that your favorite flavor of cool-aid? (answer to yourself before reading the page linked below. Don't let this challenge intimidate you into prematurely doubting your belief system. )
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/26may_ozone.htm

So, how did you do?

 

When it's 30 degrees below zero in Fargo, ND, global warming seems like a good thing.

But the only scientists who do not believe that human activity is a significant contributor to global warming are those in the pay of the fossil-fuel industry.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 2 2006, 06:12 PM) [snapback]264943[/snapback]</div>

Well, its both.

In the highly politicized world of science, grant money is pretty important. Anyone out of the mainstream has some trouble getting grant money, so there's a political component to what studies are done. Politicians always want to replay the Scopes Monkey Trial with whatever new theory there is, in order to destroy their opponents (William Jennings Bryan was a fine man, even if he was on the wrong side of that one ... but no one remembers him for anything else).

The science is pretty strong that CO2 levels have a relationship to global temps, and that places like Antartica were once heavily forrested (and what the heck was the equator like then!) That was before man was around, so its obvious that spell of global warming was not due to burning fossil fuels.

The most recent issue of Science has an article on the super volcanoes under Yosemite Park and Montana, and the amount of disruption they can cause is pretty surprising.

The scientific question is whether or not gradual increases in CO2 from human sources can cause the same thing, and pure science should try to answer that question. The problem is, and always will be, that partisan political parties will promise the grant money to "their side", and science will always follow the grant money.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Jun 3 2006, 04:25 AM) [snapback]265089[/snapback]</div>

Have you ever thought of a career in politics? You're off to a good start.

In response to the original post - I do believe in global warming. I think it might happen even if people didn't exist, but I also think we're helping it along much faster than it would occur otherwise.

 

If evolution is just a theory, then global warming is just a theory and “I think, therefore I am†is just another theory. In fact, isn’t it impossible to prove anything? :huh:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Maytrix @ Jun 3 2006, 11:33 AM) [snapback]265189[/snapback]</div>

yup. It has certainly happened in the past. The rate of climate change is more alarming this time around. That's proabably the "human touch".

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 2 2006, 08:12 PM) [snapback]264943[/snapback]</div>

For what its worth, the older I get the more I've learned that when it comes to science or politics you should do your own research, use common sense and not "drink the Koolaid" of any side.

On the science, global warming has been part of the natural warming and cooling cycle of the earth for centuries so its real. How much humans contribute to it is not clear. In fact there those who believe that the earth is actually headed into another ICE AGE because some glaciers are not melting but are getting bigger. For some reason you don't generally hear a lot about that. Though lots of atmospheric data is being compilied now, humans haven't had the technology to measure and compare the cycles of ice ages and warmings over the billions of years of earth history. For example, news about record hurricane seasons is realtive BS. Think about it, humans couldn't even count huricanes that started and died in the eastern Atlantic until there were satellites. Now that we can see them, we count'em, so the number has gone up.

On the political side, fshagan above is right, the granting of grants and research funding is political by both the government but also grants given out from PRIVATE funding. In other words you can get whatever scientific result you want if you pay for it. Of course that only makes issues like global warming even more complex.

Though I believe that each of us should do what we can to keep the planet healthy and I'll go see "An Inconvenient Truth", I remain suspicious that there is a substantial environmental industry that always needs an environmental crisis to sustain govenment grants or private funding. A lot like the industrial military complex needs a war or the threat of a war to get contracts. After all the enironmental organizations and defense contractors both need money to thrive.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Karnac @ Jun 3 2006, 05:34 PM) [snapback]265245[/snapback]</div>

I'll 2nd this one, as I dont want to repeat anyone...

 

Republican and member of the "Protest Warriors"!

There have been many thoughtful posts on this topic (and some not so thoughtful).

The fact is the Earth has been hotter in the past (much hotter 11-13 degrees or so) and much cooler (couldn't find a good number there, but think Glacier in New York!).

Humans just can't know what is "normal" climate change due to the fact that we've only started to pay attention to the climate and the fact that the climate history we can study varies dramatically.

The best thing for that could be done for the environment (according to some) is to stop using fossil fuels. Well how to do that? easy, buy the biggest most fuel inefficient thing possible, the faster we use up the resource the faster we can develop something cleaner (Hydrogen, second most abundant element in the cosmos)

Actual I always base environmental policy off of the theory "would I do that in my yard?" if the answer is no then its bad. (This generally means I am also against methane farmed composting, stinky)

The Prius for me is freedom. I drive a lot and didn't want to think about the dollars per trip when I traveled. The environmental benefit is strictly secondary.

Well that's a lot.

Personally, I think man overates most of his importance in most things, Including his ability to permenately affect the climate.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 2 2006, 08:12 PM) [snapback]264943[/snapback]</div>

Neither. It's reality.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Karnac @ Jun 3 2006, 04:34 PM) [snapback]265245[/snapback]</div>

WRONG!!! We do have the technology...ice core samples!!! From Wikipedia:

An ice core is a core sample of ice removed from an ice sheet, most commonly from the polar ice caps of Antarctica, Greenland or from high mountain glaciers elsewhere. As the ice forms from the incremental buildup of annual layers of snow, lower layers are older than upper, and an ice core contains ice formed over a range of years. The properties of the ice or inclusions within the ice can then be used to reconstruct a climatic record over the age range of the core.

Ice cores contain an abundance of climate information.

 

If what we do might possibly contribute to a dangerous change in climate, and yet we have the power to alter what we do, then what stops us from doing everything in our power to prevent a dangerous climate change.
Who cares if it is natural or man induced. Let's see what we can do and DO IT!
You can consider it "preemptive" behavior modification. Kinda like "preemtive" war?
Instead of waiting to see if we destroy the delicate ecological system that best suits our survival needs, why don't we just take the offensive and do all that we can to alter the direction that the climate change is going.
Which means paying very close attention to the major polluters: corporate america, and all the way down to individual behavior.
If people don't wanna do it, we can legistlate these changes. Which is what we may be forced to do, because some folks just don't want to pay attention to the fact that we share the world, and they don't realize that it does not belong to just a few people.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eyeguy13 @ Jun 3 2006, 11:35 PM) [snapback]265494[/snapback]</div>

Screw ice core samples!!! From Wikipedia: . . .



This figure shows the climate record of Lisiecki and Raymo (2005) [1] constructed by combining measurements from 57 globally distributed deep sea sediment cores. The measured quantity is oxygen isotope fractionation in benthic foraminifera, which serves as a proxy for the total global mass of glacial ice sheets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Five_My...mate_Change.png

Damn you humans!
What have you done to the earth in the past three million years!
You Maniacs! You blew it up!
Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!
- Think Charlton Heston in Planet of the Apes. :lol:

 

Global warming is caused by a reduction in the number of pirates.

Source: The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

 

Global Protection Astroglide Warming Lubricant

Just wipe your car with this and the tailpipe to assist with anti global warming! :huh: :mellow: :lol:

Lead by Jessie Jackson, Snowmen from across the Nation gather at the Washington Monument to protest global warming

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Karnac @ Jun 3 2006, 04:34 PM) [snapback]265245[/snapback]</div>

Some places will get warmer, and some will get colder. Any given glacier may be growing, but that hardly refutes the theory.

There's no conspiracy. There are far more environmental crises than people will ever understand, let alone deal with.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Karnac @ Jun 3 2006, 05:34 PM) [snapback]265245[/snapback]</div>

We have all become suspicious and rather cynical in this current poilitical environment. I am too!
After all, we have watched our top politicians reap huge monetary rewards for noncompetitive, unbid military contracts. We have read about Haliburton's and Kelllogg Brown Root's CEOs fortunes, and the Oil Industry's magnates, but I have not heard one word about the wealth that the scientists are raking in from this global warming venture.
I strongly doubt there is significant monetary gain from this, and until the "other side" uncovers evidence of such, I have no reason to believe there is large capital incentive to study and prove and invent cures for global warming.
However, we need to sustain our scientific community, they have to survive in our capitalist nation, they do need money. I wish they could work for free (just like others think musicians should work for free at their lavish events, because musicians LOVE what they do....yes, I am a violinist, and I need to pay rent, eat food, etc.)....but we need to support them so they will continue to do research and developement that leads to improvements in our lives. So we do need to fund the studies. I just won't confuse their need for money with the abuse of our system that the military industrial complex has learned so well.

Let me know when you read about a scientist making millions in this cliamte change industry.