How many Prius owners believe in Global Warming theory?

Obviously trolling, but I'll bite to say only this. If your viewpoints can change by watching YouTube videos, you need to do more research of your own on both "sides". Then you will find 95% of the scientists across the world, and 100% of sane people everywhere agree that it is not theory but fact.

 

The posting and thread really belongs in 'Environmental' or 'Freds'. Next to my left hand is a gas receipt:

• 09/29/2010 7:44 PM
• 519.7 miles, GPS
• 10.15 gallons
• $25.38

Bob Wilson

 

A different point of view is trolling?

 

Don't agree and I recon I'm sane.

Global warming (or climate change as its now called over here - after a couple cold years) is just a natural cycle. The one thing that proves this to me is that politicians the world over have jumped on the global warming band wagon so eagerly. Why? So they have a damn good excuse to put up tax and use global warming as the excuse. Does this tax money get used to help reduce emissions? No. Is it used to super insulate government buildings? No. It's all a load of cobblers. Give me a poke when the White House and the Houses of Parliament are carbon neutral and have PV panals on their roof and Al Gore does a little something to reduce his carbon footprint.

Until then I will treat Global Warming with the contempt it deserves.

I drive my Prius to save me money and reduce local air pollution.

 

If you ask the wrong question, you get the wrong answer. If the question is "Does the current Global Warming debate have too much emotion?" then the answer is yes. The correct question is "What are the effects of unfettered dumping of all the combustion products of all the fossil fuels being burned?"

I really doubt that the answer to the second question is "Absolutely Nothing".

 

So you base your opinion on politics and the OP bases his on Youtube videos. Jesus, no wonder this world is so screwed up. Go take some science classes people.

 

I believe in the global warming theory no more than the theory of gravity ;oP
Skip the politics, look at the science.

 

It takes more than watching a video or two to understand this issue. Allowing your views to flip-flop after watching one video is not a good sign.

Setting that aside, there are two undeniable facts relating to climate change:

1) Climate change is natural and in some, but not all cases, cyclical.

2) Humans are influencing climate change through human activity.

Those two are facts. Only a fool or obdurate person would argue otherwise. The real debate becomes how much influence do humans have, and how resilient are the natural balances. Belief doesn't enter into it. Science does.

Tom

 

Anyone can post anything on the internet for any reason. Similarly, in our new world of irresponsible "journalism", people can make unsubstantiated claims on television which are not challenged by the interviewers. The trick is to apply critical thinking to these statements to discern what may be true from what is propaganda. It isn't always easy. Good luck in your quest for the truth.

 

Two problems above.

Problem one: Putting "common sense" and "Ron Paul" in the same paragraph without using phrases like "lack of" or "has no".

Problem two: I love it when deniers whine about multimillionaire University researchers picking on those poor, poor corporate executives. Bizarro World, anyone?

 

I believe in Global Climate Change, which is really what it is, I believe its a combination of natural and man made, I believe we are making a BIG mistake in pretending nothing will happen, I believe the worst people have come out against trying to understand, get educated and help come up with solutions to help lessen the problem.

 

As a lifelong Democrat and environmentally concerned person I was strongly influenced by Al Gores movie."An Inconvenient Truth".
A year later after learning how facts were distorted in that movie, it made me no longer want to blindly accept any of the global warming science as truth.
Anthropogenic global warming theory may one day be shown to be correct.
As of now,runaway AGW is purely an unproven hypothesis derived by very poor computer models.

 

Apparently he already has.

 

Let's say Climate Change isn't real and we act like it's not real.
Best case scenario: Nothing different
Worst case scenario: Nothing different

Let's say Climate Change isn't real and we act like it is.
Best case scenario: Cleaner air
Worst case scenario: Playing a little bit more for cleaner air.

Let's say Climate Change is real and we act like it isn't.
Best case scenario: A friggin' ugly mess.
Worst case scenario: The End Of Civilization As We Know it.

Let's say Climate Change is real and we act like it is:
Best case scenario: We save the world, are embiggened in history books.
Worst case scenario: We're already too late, but we can slow it down significantly.

So, with so much to lose and so little to gain, even if you don't understand the science, what's to lose by acting as if Climate Change is real?

 

the people on this planet were doomed the day someone decided to make politics out of the environment. you can't trust anything anymore. evidence this way, then evidence the other way. change the terms to fit your goal. falsified evidence. all of this is in the name of politics and agendas. somewhere in the middle, the truth lies, but it's doubtful we'll ever find it.

 

I read that even the Queen was under the impression that it was supposed to assist with that, as well...

 

i dont

 

Well said. I said about the same thing (about the truth in the middle) here about a year ago in a similar post and got totally reamed. Where is Shawn anyway?