What do you think? from Global Warming - fact or fiction?

SimeyC Moderated by SimeyC

Is Global Warming Real? Got your own Lens?

submit
  • Reply
    Laniann Laniann Oct 16, 2009 @ 8:11 pm
    I don't really know, like you stated both sides have valid reasoning - however, both sides are also following their own agenda. Very well presented. 5*s
  • Reply
    mysticmama mysticmama Oct 11, 2009 @ 1:26 pm
    Fantastic and well put together lens!
  • Reply
    Bill Bill Sep 30, 2009 @ 6:09 pm
    It's Political Fiction.
    http://global-warming-hoax-blog.blogspot.com
  • Reply
    Septilin Septilin Sep 27, 2009 @ 3:27 pm
    Good Job!Nice lense
  • Reply
    BarbRad BarbRad Aug 3, 2009 @ 7:02 pm
    I think this lens deserves five stars, not four. I applaud your apparent objectivity.
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Jul 9, 2009 @ 9:25 am | in reply to California_Dreamin
    You make some good points. I note that there are some very respected scientists who deny the existance of Global Warming too. There are a lot of people making a lot of money on both sides of the argument, and people seem to be rushing into buying Green products without really researching or understanding the issues.

    Point in case: those energy saving lightbulbs - yes -they are great and save a lot of energy and reduce the carbon footprint - however, most people don't realize that these lightbulbs have mercury in them and cannot be disposed in normal garbage -that the problem - save the world from one problem, and pollute it with another.

    I'd love to see a world-wide forum on the issue, bring both sides together, look at the issues and decide what needs to be done - the world is changing, and whether man is the cause or not does not matter. Honest open debate is needed, and TV needs to inform more about the issues...
  • Reply
    California_Dreamin California_Dreamin Jul 9, 2009 @ 8:34 am
    This is obviously a complicated issue, but the idea that global warming is a hoax is absurd. How would the mechanics of arranging this hoax go down exactly? Did some of the world's most accomplished and respected scientists get together in a smokey back room somewhere to work out the details of just how they would go about pulling the wool over everyone's eyes? And what possible financial incentive would propel them to undertake such an elaborate conspiracy?

    As for global warming deniers, I think their motives range from the monetary, (in the case of large polluters) to the political, (in the case of the Republicans).

    Those who are convinced that global warming is a clear and present danger to our survival may be wrong, but they are certainly not hoaxters.
  • Reply
    blue22d blue22d Jun 4, 2009 @ 12:43 am
    Nice lens. I believe it is mostly in their heads. I don't trust A. Gore's motives. We need to do our part with our resources but there are just as many scientist who do not buy into Gore's rhetoric.
  • Reply
    KimGiancaterino KimGiancaterino May 15, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
    As with any situation that involves politicians, one needs only to 'follow the money' to unmask the real motives behind the fear. Regardless of whether global warming is real or a hoax, we are all guests on this planet and should treat it with respect. Squid Angel Blessed.
  • Reply
    calicoskies calicoskies Apr 29, 2009 @ 1:06 pm
    You have some good points there! 5 star lens :)
  • Reply
    phuppie phuppie Apr 28, 2009 @ 10:37 pm
    Ecological footprint of an average per person in north america is anywhere between 7 to 9 hectares of land used. This means each person needs this much land to live including what is used, like wood, to the waste, after each meal. A person living in a third world country uses 1.5 hectares of land. 9 hectares of land use for each person is not going to sustain us for very long. We would need 5 earths to keep this up. We need to change our consuming habits in order to fight anything, let alone climate change.
  • Reply
    papawu papawu Apr 27, 2009 @ 12:36 am
    This is certainly a hot button topic and should be paid closer attention to. After watching both Al Gore and Bob Dole's documentaries, I have found myself quite a bit more alarmed. Great job on this lens.
  • Reply
    Janusz Janusz Apr 26, 2009 @ 4:52 am
    Of course Global Warming is fact. We are kidding ourselves when we believe Nature hasn´t been affected by Mankind!.. Blessed by a Squid Angel :)
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 23, 2009 @ 7:05 pm | in reply to BenB.
    You are correct - and I guess that the economy must be part of the equation at some point - it's great being green, but if it leads to a poorer nation, it'll lead to different problems such as health care, poverty etc. Interesting point you make that non-environmental issues must also be considered.
  • Reply
    BenB. BenB. Apr 23, 2009 @ 4:51 pm | in reply to SimeyC
    Yes there is. Reducing carbon emissions and other "green ideas" can seriously hurt our production power, which in turn damages our economy.
  • Reply
    Frankster Frankster Apr 21, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
    Excellent lens. I hope it makes people think about our planet. What caused it is not the issue, it's that IF we can do anything to slow it down, we should. We need to take better care of our home: earth or the question will be mute anyway.
  • Reply
    Brit303 Brit303 Apr 21, 2009 @ 8:42 am
    Man's effect on the environment is measureable. But it's been building since the dawn of the Industrial Age. That's when the world started using fossil fuels heavily. This isn't a new phenomenon.

    Yes, the United States should do what it can to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, global levels as long as underdeveloped nations are allowed to skirt the law. It's time for China, India, and others to step up to the plate.
  • Reply
    tandemonimom tandemonimom Apr 18, 2009 @ 9:20 am
    PS Lensrolled to "Compassionate Christian Conservation".
  • Reply
    tandemonimom tandemonimom Apr 18, 2009 @ 9:18 am
    I think that we humans are much more fragile than the environment. If we did enough damage to kill ourselves off, the earth would eventually recover. I agree with you that the jury is still out on the absolute accuracy of global warming (I can't help but remember the very same groups were touting "The Next Ice Age!" scare in the 70s), but I do think most of the "green" measures are very good ideas for the sake of our own health, and our children's.
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 17, 2009 @ 2:50 pm | in reply to Cari_Kay
    You make a great point here - Mother Nature could do more damage in five minutes than man has done in 140 years! I agree though, we do need to look after our planet - there's no harm in being Green!
  • Reply
    Cari_Kay Cari_Kay Apr 17, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
    My research for my Masters involved quite a bit of study on Global Warming. I fall in the camp that believes global warming and cooling is a natural phenomena. We really don't have much say in what will happen. A good volcanic eruption will affect our atmosphere far more than we ever could.

    That said, we really do need to take care of our planet...no doubt about that.

    Excellent lens!
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 17, 2009 @ 8:55 am | in reply to kiwisoutback
    *grin* thank you for your comments and your blessing.

    To answer your question 'who are the Green corporations' - well look at the TV and you'll see a lot of companies telling you about their green products (bio-degradable, electric etc) - if you research some of these (for instance some toilet paper makers) - their product has always been green - but they are advertising 'green' to make you buy their product before any other.

    So the motivation in a lot of cases is money. Do you think Toyota, Honda and GM are working on electric cars for the environment? I don't - there's a huge market for electric cars and the first to design them will get a huge share of that market - does it help the ecology - sure - but that, in my opinion is a side effect - not the motivation.

    If we take out 'profit' from the equation, we'd come up with a whole lot of different solutions - you still need coal powerstations to create electric - etc
  • Reply
    kiwisoutback kiwisoutback Apr 17, 2009 @ 8:14 am
    You're right, statistics can be easily manipulated, and that's why this debate will never end (lucky you!). Great debate topic, this should do very well. Squid Angel blessed!
  • Reply
    Igeso Igeso Apr 16, 2009 @ 2:23 pm
    Very nice lens, hope you visit mine ;-) 5*
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 15, 2009 @ 8:03 pm | in reply to Treasures-By-Brenda
    Thank you for the blessing!!! I think you hit the nail on the head - it doesn't matter which side is right or wrong - people just need to think through the issues and not rely on the media to make their decisions! Use the web to find out about both sides and make an informed decision!
  • Reply
    Treasures-By-Brenda Treasures-By-Brenda Apr 15, 2009 @ 4:32 pm
    I'm not knowledgeable enough about it all to comment but I think you've done a great job putting this together for people to think about. Blessed by an Angel.

    Brenda
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 14, 2009 @ 2:22 pm | in reply to thrivingmom
    You may be right on that - but - and it's a big but - the car makers are selling it as a green car - also USA isn't the only country buying them!
  • Reply
    thrivingmom thrivingmom Apr 14, 2009 @ 11:10 am
    I disagree with your point on the electric car. The main reason they are needed isn't to have "clean" energy powered cars. It's to get us to the point where we no longer need foreign oil. We're so dependent on foreign oil that it has launched a war and forces us to do business with some very dangerous people.
  • Reply
    thrivingmom thrivingmom Apr 14, 2009 @ 11:09 am
    I disagree with your point on the electric car. The main reason they are needed isn't to have "clean" energy powered cars. It's to get us to the point where we no longer need foreign oil. We're so dependent on foreign oil that it has launched a war and forces us to do business with some very dangerous people.
  • Reply
    thrivingmom thrivingmom Apr 14, 2009 @ 11:09 am
    I disagree with your point on the electric car. The main reason they are needed isn't to have "clean" energy powered cars. It's to get us to the point where we no longer need foreign oil. We're so dependent on foreign oil that it has launched a war and forces us to do business with some very dangerous people.
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 13, 2009 @ 10:03 am | in reply to Rob
    No...ramble away! Some very good points. I personally think that it's simply more than pollution etc. There are a lot more man made problems that have nothing to do with Global Warming that effect the world - cutting down trees in the Amazon is perhaps far more dangerous - and yet the media hardly picks up on this...perhaps Al Gore should do a new documentary 'How do we live without Oxygen'
  • Reply
    Rob Rob Apr 13, 2009 @ 7:54 am
    I honestly think the pollution of our environments, the destruction of land to be used for housing and feeding humans to be a much greater threat then the planet warming up, it is true in certain times in the past that CO2 levels were much higher then they are today, very much so. But to say that we are not disrupting climate would be absolutely ignorant. How much of an effect would this on the planet is something I don't think we could ever calculate either, play with some non-linear dynamics and you will see why. These are chaotic systems, and there is no telling what is going to happen by our actions. And how do we know what the "balance" is. We could make a minor problem even worse by acting upon it. We are not yet at the level of technology to really try and regulate the planets temperature. I am pessimistic about the future, I believe that the house of cards that is props up humans is being cut from underneath us, and that we are heading towards the 6th mass extinction of species. Sites like AAAS.org and NAS.org have many articles pertaining to the exponential rate of species extinction. This rate actually started prior to us being aware of what we were doing. This began after the last ice age when modern man was really beginning to take over the planet, the largest animals were hunted first to extinction, or pushed out of their native environments for settlements. Sorry for the rambling :) just one mans view.
    Cheers
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 13, 2009 @ 6:59 am
    Sprituality - the point I was making with the graph is that it is all 'fuzzy' math based on conjecture. I've seen graphs where they show the CO2 level has risen dramitcally several times over the last couple of million years. Ther is no doubt that there's no harm in reducing CO2 emitions and being green, but I also feel that we are being manipulated by corporate America into buying Green products for the sake of buting them!
  • Reply
    Nochipra Nochipra Apr 12, 2009 @ 8:51 pm
    A very interesting topic! I have a debate lens myself and love these kinds of lenses.
  • Reply
    SimeyC SimeyC Apr 12, 2009 @ 8:10 pm
    Thanks - what was interesing is that it was the 'ice shelves' news that inspired me. I did some research and the facts portrayed on the whole subject aren't always as they seem - the news puts their own spin on it, as do the 'green' side and the 'non-green' side. There doesn't seem to be one place on the web that presents the facts without taking a side!!!

    Thanks for the comments guys! and taking part in the debate!
  • Reply
    drifter0658 drifter0658 Apr 12, 2009 @ 8:06 pm
    Excellent debate and timely as well. The news this last week about large ice shelves in the Antarctic beginning to shatter puts this lens on target.
  • Reply
    MikeMoore MikeMoore Apr 12, 2009 @ 2:32 pm
    Great dule, Simey. I've added my two cents worth.

Global Warming - fact or fiction? See more at Global Warming - fact or fiction?