Why does global warming have any credibility since we know that the UN was instrumental in promoting it?

Were they also instrumental in the Kyoto plan? the plan does not help the environment. It only helps under developed countries aquire the wealth by selling credits to richer countries. They are building plants that will help pollute the rest of the world. I know because I have helped in transporting plants from developed countries to their countries that will pollute their environment.

So why do we support this global warming farce?

Answer:
Do you mean the western wealth distribution plan? It is just a new angle on what they have been trying for years. Take our wealth and give it to the third world armpit of your choice.
Regardless of whether or not you believe that Global Warming is naturally occuring or it is caused by humans does not negate the fact that we, humans, are polluting the environment. We should do whatever we can to clean up the Earth and stop the pollution we as humans are causing.
I know that the environment needs to be protected and cleaned up now, but I have little or no confidence in anything that has more than one agenda.we would all do better to investigate the things we support and demand answers before deciding to support them, and should never accept anything on face value.
Don't Knuckle Under to the Enviro-Luddites
By David Limbaugh
Tuesday, March 6, 2007

In spiritually weak moments, I sometimes envy the blind faith of the environ-zealots, even if the object of their faith is hardly sacred.

For all their self-congratulation over their allegiance to science and the scientific method, they flatly violate the spirit of scientific inquiry in their approach to environmental issues.

Of course they cloak all of their claims with the cover of science. They accompany their manifestos with endorsements from hundreds or thousands of scientists, who serve as the functional equivalent of human shields to insulate their extreme claims from scrutiny by the not yet converted.

Never mind that many of the credentialed signatories are anything but experts on climate science. They are scientists, and they buy into the dogma. End of discussion.

Never mind that the reports said to be the final word on these subjects are sometimes crafted by results-oriented, ideologically intoxicated bureaucrats and published before the signatories have had the opportunity to read them.

What matters is that the bishops of this secular cult have issued an edict proclaiming that a consensus on global warming has been reached: It is occurring, human behavior is contributing substantially to it and radical alterations of that behavior are mandated as a moral imperative.

When the religion's evangelists are challenged, their answer is always the same: There is a consensus. All scientists agree, except those having sold out to evil corporations with a vested interest in disputing the theology.

They approach their faith with an unflinching zeal reminiscent of Dan Rather's protest upon being caught promoting forged documents, that the underlying claims of the documents remained true.

They claim to have definitive proof of their theories, yet they can't even be sure of much of their data, much less their ends-driven analysis of it. Though I certainly don't purport to be an expert, I doubt that there is any more science behind their claims than that, for example, behind the ever-changing claims about the benefits or detriments of coffee, or the pros and cons of the Atkins Diet.

They demand draconian changes in our lifestyle, insisting that without them the planet will soon be on an irreversible path toward inhabitability. Yet they completely ignore that other nations, like China, presently are on course to contribute far more pollutants to the environment in the near and distant future than we could possibly nullify by heading back to the Stone Ages as they prescribe.

While I can't go so far as to say that the deacons of this church are primarily driven by a desire to destroy capitalism and its glorious civilization-advancing fruits, I will say that they seem unconcerned that their demands would have that effect. They pretend to aspire to carbon neutrality, but the only thing they'll end up neutralizing is human progress.

Though these types routinely denigrate Christians as unthinking robots whose faith is based on a disgraceful form of human weakness, at least our God encourages us not to abandon our reason or ignore doubts we might have. We are commanded to love God with all our heart, all our soul and all our mind , and always to be prepared to give the reasons for our belief.

Our faith is not so fragile as to be threatened, but instead is strengthened by intellectual doubts and an examination of the evidence. We are never told that we cannot question its precepts because our church fathers arrived at a consensus on doctrine and memorialized it in various creeds.

But the religious zeal of the earth goddess Gaia's apostles doesn't permit them to question any article of their faith, as intellectual curiosity is strictly forbidden. It also discourages them from holding accountable their demonstrably failed prophets, whose fantastic claims have long been discredited, such as the infamous Paul Ehrlich or the actor Ted Danson.

Nor do its congregants seem even to consider that its apocalyptic claims are born of the grossest form of humanistic pride, that which says that as a result of sheer human activity we will destroy the balance of life on earth.

Such hubris obviously prevents them from marveling that "the universe is specifically tweaked to enable life on earth -- a planet with scores of improbable and interdependent life-supporting conditions that make it a tiny oasis in a vast and hostile universe." (See Norman Geisler and Frank Turek's "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.")

We should be responsible stewards of the environment, but we should not shut down scientific inquiry or Western Civilization itself on the hyperbolic demands of those, who, imprisoned by their own pagan idolatry, refuse to follow the scientific standards they require of everyone else.

David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics
Because environmentalism is the last refuge of communism. Socialist, Communist and other Leftist who would like to strip of our individuality and freedom have banded together to use Global warming as an excuse to strip us of our freedom.

So with so many harping on it people have come to accept the lie. I say lie not because I don't believe the climate is getting warmer but that I don't believe if it is, that 1, human acitivity is causing it and 2, that there is anything we can do about it.

If we can't do anything about it. It no longer serves the purpose of providing a convenient excuse for taking our freedom.
And please overcome your FEAR OF COMMI´S or whatever...
We´re in 2006... PLEASE... grow up or don´t grow old badly

AND STOP YOUR PSYCHOTIC VISION OF SOCIALISM

Sweden is a very socialist country and is very free at the same time. Don´t tell me it´s a dictature or whatever. Here´s what there better at than the US:
- environment protection
- gender equality
- peaceful
- level of education
- medicine
- life expectancy
- overall life satisfaction
- quality of life
- level of corruption
- open minded
- help to developping countries
- safety

So, is that the threat there is by pooling more and advancing the society ? Isn´t what companies do by economy of scale ? Doesn´t companies look kind of big sovietic structures (soviet=board) ?

Is Sweden THAT a threat ?

Just check HDI and you´ll see that almost every country having a higher HDI (Human Developpement Index) is more social than the US... I don´t force you to have this system... it´s just that it works so thanks for not criticizing what you don´t know about

China has some large problems, not because it´s communist (becaue it is not), but an undemocratic overcapitalist state.

Instead of pooling efforts in society we can also shoot at each others... it´s also a viable option.

The UN is very instrumental at promoting polcies like developpement, education, culture, wealth, health... oh mine ! are we beeing used to do good things ?
the USA is probably the biggest contributor today
but people have been messing with the planets ecosystems for a long time already
and many countries are now jointly responsible

Is global warming a man-made menace?

not all there are natural cycles in the planets life
but a lot is influenced by mans existance ,and this is increasing with overpopulation,putting strains on Natural resources and increasing contaminations as well as destructions of essential componants the ensure living conditions for all life forms

some home truths

politicians and scientists who work for politicians have downplayed the facts because solutions are expensive and means change and change effects many people income,and most of the world is kept in the dark of the real things that are going on.


in North Africa,India,Mexico ,millions of people are effected by land loss and desertification


in recent times thousands of people have died because of exessive heat,usually old people.in India ,Mexico and France,
deforestation causing desertification,the desert conditions causing very cold nights and scorching hot days

in china, thousands of what used to be farmers are running for their lives from the dust storms that have burried their towns and turned their lands into dessert,the globe where they were got to hot for them .
and instead of producing food they are now needing it from some where else,and they will drastically effect the world food prices when they start buying water in the form of grains ,at any cost destabalising governments, in some countries ,could be the result
(are you seeing more Chinese around interested in agricultural lands ,we do here in Mexico)

,the Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year
and all of the desserts we know are a results of mans actions ,and they are increasing ,not getting less ,in the dinosaurs days ,there were no desserts.

collectively this planet is drying up because of bad farming practices like,over grazing and fertilizers,

as far as the food production is concerned, Global warming or some of its effects are serious,rising seas result in landloss

each degree rise in temperature means 10%crop loss

more landloss because of desertification every year,we have less areble land to produce food ,for an extra 70 million people ,

and there is less and less water (because of deforestation),to irrigate this production ,
and there are less and less farmers to do it..
who are overpumping deep carbon aquifiers
who are plowing more and more unstable lands because they have lost so many million hectares to desertification ,
because of bad farming practises ,such as using fertilizers and heavy machinary or over grazing

RISING SEAS
The northpole is melting ,and we will know it without ice in our life times.
this does not affect the sea level because it is ice that is already in the water.but the melting ice from Green land and the south pole ,are another matter.

Global warming is in theory reversable,but it will mean global co operation between all countries ,and taking into account human nature and the world politics ,it is unlikely that this will happen,

At least not untill we are all in the middle of planetary disastres and it becomes a battle for the survival of humanity every where.

SOLUTIONS
if you want to help the planet ,plant a tree every week ,if everyone on the planet did we we would be able to reverse the destructive processes

reduce carbon emisions,and they are already working on that by alternative forms of energy and regulations on carbon producing materials,aerosol cans,burning rubbish,industrial chimneys,powerplants etc.

the capture of carbon and the production of water and assist the aquiferous manta.

the world bank pays large subsidies for reforrestation to capture carbon and the best tree for this is the Pawlonia

Waterharvesting projects ,such as millions of small dams.to redirect over ground waterflows from the rains into the ground to supply subteranian water supplies.

the protection of existing forrests.

stop building more highways,urban planning to include vegetation stop building cities encourage people to return to the land to conduct their business from there which now has become possible thanks to the internet.

education to motivate people to auto sufficiency by building more home food gardens.

education on environmental awareness
education on family planning to curb over´populaion

Agricultural education and improvements to follow the principals or sustainability and soil management.

more environmental or land ,design to prevent bush fires,such as--fire breaks

,more dams.regulations and control for public behaviour

alternative effeciant public transport to discourage the use of the internal conbustion engine

recicling wastes,limit water use

i am a Permaculture Consultant for the department of Ecology for the regional government in Guerrero Mexico
http://spaces.msn.com/byderule

Source(s) Lester E Brown is the director and founder of the global institute of Environment in the United states .he has compiled a report based on all the satalite information available from NASA,and all the information that has
come from Universities and American embassies WORLD WIDE ,
his little book--a planet under stress , Plan B has been trans lated into 50 languages and won the best book award in 2003.

The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.



More Questions and Answers:

More Questions and Answers:
  • Have the global warming deniers become desperate? Paying $10,000?
  • Do Americans really believe that Global warming is just rubbish?
  • what are the kinds of water solubles?
  • Could global warming trigger a sudden catastrophe?
  • what does plankton convert carbon dioxide to?
  • how can we cope with the climate change?
  • why current flows from positive to negetive terminal of battery?
  • Envirothon?
  • what is the unplowed land between plowed land called in Great Britain?