I would like to start with saying how strange it is that scientists can get two completely different answers to this question from presumably the same data. There is only one atmosphere after all. One website says "The conclusion is that climate change is "unstoppable" and cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, as is proposed in current legislation." ( http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/global_warming/2007/12/10/55974.html) another website says that "For over the past 200 years, the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, and deforestation have caused the concentrations of heat-trapping "greenhouse gases" to increase significantly in our atmosphere. These gases prevent heat from escaping to space, somewhat like the glass panels of a greenhouse." (http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.htm)
After reading the links on Mr. Voight's website and reading other people's blogs I've sort of come up with my answer. If global warming is happening the eventual results could be catastrophic. Like Subbu said, if countries get hit with more hurricanes and water levels rise, lots of people will be homeless or dead. I think the more we can do to prevent global warming, by cutting down on emissions, the better, but we should put our spending in perspective. We should also start developing new technologies because someday the fossil fuels will run out and it's better to be prepared than to be caught unprepared.
Regardless of weather we like it, America sets an example for the rest of the world. If we start cutting down on emissions other countries are more likely to follow suit. Even if global warming doesn't exist or is a natural cycle I think we should try to cut down on emissions because we are the ones who are putting all that extra CO2 in the atmosphere and it can't be healthy for anyone. (ideally this would cause Americans to become healthier because we would have to start walking places instead of driving everywhere.) Developing countries strive to be like the U.S. in certain ways and the entire world can't live like we do.
Even if the polar ice caps melt or the climate changes dramatically I think humans will find a way to overcome that difficulty. We will build things differently, live differently and structure our society differently to cope with the climate changes.
So, to summarize I think that global warming is a natural cycle, but we should still try to cut down on emissions and develop new technologies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It seems as though you have read a lot and thoroughly justified you response. However, I have an issue with your statement that almost all other countries want to be like us. It seems to me that this may be true of the citizens of other countries or individuals but I don't believe this is the case on a grand scale, especially not as a stated goal. It seems to me that developing countries need us but they are also simultaneously out to get us. I think this comes from jealously but I don't know. We are the almighty consumer of goods. China for example, isn't going to follow our lead becuase it will drive up their cost of production which in turn, decreases the amount of stuff they can sell to Americans. We buy stuff from these other countries becuase of its value. Value is determined by cost and quality. There is really nothing stopping other countries, or ours for that matter, from maintaining the status quo. These cuts and 'necessary' measures are elective. If the US takes on this burden in the hope that others follow, we will continue down a handicapped path that will continue to hurt our economy and quality of life.
Post a Comment