I was asking questions on the FOX News biased thread too. I posted this (near the bottom) there, its my first contribution to the class message board. I also recently learned more from my text, but here is the first post for now, and my comments that are here and there amidst the article snips talk about consuming less. We are more or less having a joke at how so many will politically manipulate people to better serve their own agenda instead of discussing facts. And the manipulators do a great job because so many believe them and shift their focus away from any real issues.
The annoying scientist who wrote my text says:
******edited to say that although reading his writing is annoying I do think he knows what he is talking about, it is just a difficult subject for me to learn and I like to whine about it***********
"Opinions differ about when or if increased warming will happen and about what the consequences will be if it does happen. Some believe an average temperature increase will melt some of the polar ice cap, flooding coastal cities and changing the global climate patterns. Others believe that increased carbon dioxide and warmer climate patterns would produce lush vegetation, therefore benefitting humans through increased agricultural production. Still other scientists have the opinion that no predictions can be made because of the number of other variables involved. Increased water vapor and dust in the atmosphere, for example, could reflect more and more sunlight. This could cancel any warming from the greenhouse effect or, in fact, could lead to an overall cooling trend."
~Bill W. Tillery from Physcial Science 6th ed
It goes on to say that scientist do all agree that human activity has reached the point that pollution has become an "influencing part of the atmosphere". The article/message board entry I am posting below has some information that explains what I'm thinking about this subject. I came here to see all sides of the issue and as many facts as possible.
*********************************************
Ok, here is the Fox news article snips (with my explanation for class message board) I read on Global Warming that is kicking Al Gore's butt that caused me to ask for more info. The Kyoto stuff is from me looking it up on Wikipedia because I am completely ignorant on the subject, which is why I am here with those who know what is going on. My little teenage/young adult community college kid classmates don't care and say the craziest things that prove they aren't even reading the assignments or links.
*******************************************
The information I read began with this introduction:
"As tallied up at JunkScience.com courtesy of the global warmers’ own
data, Kyoto is estimated to have cost about $150 billion so far, while
only hypothetically reducing the average global temperature by 0.0015
degrees Centigrade.
At that rate, it would take 667 years and cost $100 trillion to
hypothetically avert just 1 degree Centigrade of global warming.
But such infinitesimal estimates of averted global warming would only
apply, of course, if Kyoto’s signatories actually complied with its
provisions. They are finding it virtually impossible to even do that."
and went on to explain that Al Gore claimed to understand this
information and when asked if he thought Kyoto
****(The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change is an amendment to the international treaty on climate
change, assigning mandatory emission limitations for the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions to the signatory nations.
The objective is the "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in
the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate system.")**** so sayeth Wikipedia
would actually make a difference and Al Gore replied, "Hell no!" The
article went on to explain that he supported spending the trillions of
dollars (or maybe it was just one trillion so far and the trillIONS
comes into effect over the 6 hundred and some years to reduce one
degree... "to demonstrate that international support could be mustered
for action on the environment" which the article scoffs at as "quite an
expensive political exercise."
This information has caused me to consider the hidden (most likely
political) agenda to both sides of the Global Warming issue. I haven't
seen the Gore movie yet but I am glad that this information will help me
to view it more objectively when I do see it. I mean initially
everyone's thoughts are, "What could be wrong with taking action to save
our world from global warming!? " But realistically, trillions of
dollars could be spent in other ways, teaching people to slow down and
consume less which is really the only thing that will have any real
effect on the pollution in our world. However, if Kyoto really cracked
down and imposed regulations that would change our way of life, and
actually made a difference, the people would rebel, especially in
America, home of the "greedy capitolistic pigs" as my high school
government teacher lovingly referred to us.
********************************************
That is what I posted to one of the message board assignments. The link to "Junk Science" was given to us by the professor and it seems to have a lot of links to Fox.News stories so I just wondered why he chose the link. www.junkscience.com
We also got three other links and he just added 3 links on vaccines and the vaccine scare that I also looked at, along with 3 chapters from a college text and homework assignments for each chapter all due in one week of summer class (yay) so although I am interested and would love to have a great class discussion, the kiddos aren't reading the links. I figured a lot of people here in Global would have already educated themselves on these issues so I came for the real deal.
*****************************************
You can probably see (above) why we are having a joke on Al Gore and the general practice of duping people to advance one's political agenda. You have to do a LOT of reading and research to NOT be duped, and most people don't have the time or energy so they believe whatever is presented most dramatically... and scientists are anything but dramatic. If you were reading my boring text you would completely understand.
At the end, I mentioned links that I would be looking for on this forum on Global Warming and AG posted a collection of links from varied perspectives. Lots of great information from all perspectives on those if anyone is interested.