Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
moving my post from one global warming controversy article to a more relevant one
Line 24: Line 24:     
:And where does this assertion come from, that the politics is "dominated" by the pro-AGW side?  How is that measured?  Not to mention the idea that they're "anti-American".  This part needs an edit.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 16:10, 8 March 2008 (EST)
 
:And where does this assertion come from, that the politics is "dominated" by the pro-AGW side?  How is that measured?  Not to mention the idea that they're "anti-American".  This part needs an edit.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 16:10, 8 March 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
::I'm aware that there's controversy over the causes of global warming on different sides of the political debate.  As I understand it, liberals generally think global warming is either directly caused by, or enhanced by human activity.  And conservatives feel that global warming, if it exists, is probably not caused by human activity.  Is that a fair summation of both sides of the debate as you see it?
 +
 +
::Anyway, assuming I'm not incorrectly summarising the positions, I have a few questions.  Do conservatives believe ANY global warming, or global warming ''of any significance'' is happening?  If so, do conservatives believe it would be a good thing to modify our behaviour with regards to doing what we can to 'lighten our load' on the home God gave us?  Even if you believe '''no''' global warming is happening, do you think it is a good idea to live as frugally as possible?  Do conservatives believe there is any point in recycling, or reducing our use of fossil fuels, or reduce our carbon load on the planet?
 +
 +
::It seems to me that even if you don't believe global warming is caused by human activity,that frugal living, parsimony and minimal use of the limited stock of materials God has given us is a good and proper lifestyle.  It is our planet, and God would want us to husband it well.  [[User:CescF|CescF]] 14:36, 21 May 2008 (EDT)
22

edits

Navigation menu