Rather than debate if it's global warming or cooling, why not simply call the issue: pollution?

Question

There will be the constant debate over whether we're in a global warming or cooling phase, how much we contribute to it, etc., but I believe it takes away from the real issue at hand: pollution. Pollution affects the planet, which affects us. It affects our health. We need to make changes simply for this reason. And all of the attempts -- recycling, going green -- all contribute to being better to the planet and ourselves. Don't you agree that this is a matter of renaming the issue?

Answer 1

You make a valid point, for pollution and man made structures is the main cause of the our environmental problems. If we paid more attention to to cause than the inevitable result ten this issues would probably be no longer an issue.

Answer 2

Global warming/climate change has just become a new religious cult based in greedy power grabbing and hopes of world domination through "climate legislation". In the past it was the religious zealots who burned the truth telling scientists at the stake today it is climate change political zealots trying to silence the truth tellers and sell the world some very expensive SNAKE OIL.



It seems global warming advocates are determined to turn logic and biology upside down. Anyone who remebers basic high school biology knows carbon dioxide is essential to plant life as oxygen is essential to human life. These two basic facts can't be separated. Only Obama-style liberals will attempt to convince us about how critical combating global warming is to the Earth's survival. As then Sen. Hillary Clinton said to Gen. David Petreaus, we must be "...willing to suspend all disbelief." I'm not willing to do so!



Global warming, or climate change, which ever they decide to call it this year, is not based on science at all. it's all based on the consensus of a few scientist who have something to gain by furthering this farce. Guess what that is? $$$$



Anyone who believes Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant should stop breathing. Since we exhale Carbon Dioxide in every breath, we are literally polluting the atmosphere. So stop breathing and reduce your carbon footprint, or say NO to cap and trade & the whole global warming hoax.



We can't project an accurate forecast a week in advance and yet we say that we're doomed in the future? I believe in eliminating waste and keeping things clean so that I, and my family, can safely enjoy the outdoors but I also know where the comforts of life come from and that is manufacturing that uses energy and supplies that are either grown or mined somehow. Follow the research grants and see what is being pushed.



I have a simple question I would like someone to answer for me, If the specific gravity (relative density) of air is 1.00 and the specific gravity (relative density) of CO2 is 1.5189, that means CO2 is heavier than air and settles on the Earth's surface where green plants need it. How then can CO2 be in the Earth's upper atmosphere and stratosphere trapping the Sun's rays and heating up the planet? Anybody? Anybody? Hello? That's what I thought.

Answer 3

Actually pollution causes other problems. You can't make naturally occurring things into pollution. It is like trying to control the dirt in the air in the desert Southwest and other areas of the West.



What you are doing is mixing the known pollutants that are being controlled with greenhouse gases which are not technically pollutants since the majority of it is from natural sources.

Answer 4

Cooling wouldn't be caused by pollution though - it'd just be evidence that CO2 in the amounts emitted (i.e., the proportion of the atmosphere that is CO2 now that wasn't CO2 200 years ago is 1/10,000th) doesn't cause warming that shows up amid all the natural variation.



The issue isn't "pollution" because that's already addressed - everything in auto exhaust except CO2 and water vapor (which, ironically, is the stronger of those two greenhouse gases) is already regulated at the state and federal level.

Answer 5

the main serious procedures that the persons can try against worldwide warming is getting rid of their older kind autos (1979 Buick) because of the fact, older autos emmitt greater poisonous fumes into the air. Its obvious that the greater technological stepped forward a automobile is, the fewer risky gases it emmitts. A automobile that replaced into geared up 3 or 4 years in the past would be greater financial equipment friendly than a automobile that replaced into assembled 35 years in the past. for top populated cities which contain long island, Bus and Taxi companys ought to replace modern-day automobiles with autos that are powered by hydrogen or electrical energy. in basic terms think of, if each and every considerable city used the Toyota Prius as taxi's, there could be a decreased point of toxins, and additionally taxi fares could desire to be significantly decrease besides.

Answer 6

Not really. Some forms of pollution contribute to a cooling effect (the "nuclear winter" that comes from excessive particulates in the atmosphere), but the greenhouse gases - in particular C02 - are overwhelmingly causing global warming. This is manifested primarily in the polar regions, which have shown an accelerating warming over the past couple of decades and clearly the ice caps, glaciers, ice sheets are melting at an alarming rate. Some pollutants are rather transient and might do some chemical damage such as acid rain, but the effects of global warming are far less regionalized - they are going to be GLOBAL in terms of coastal communities being flooded by sea level rise, and of course the tragic end to species such as the polar bears. It would ill-behoove us to lump this looming catastrophe in with oil slicks, algal blooms and localized contaminants. It's a much more serious issue on a global scale.

Answer 7

CO2 is a natural and vital component of our atmosphere. Without it there would be no photosynthesis, therefore no plant growth and no food. All the oxygen in our atmosphere comes as a bi product of photosynthesis, so there would be nothing to breathe.

CO2 underpins all life on this planet, so it is nonsense to label it pollution. Doing so is simply a tax scam, and that is the real reason for doing it

Answer 8

Global warming not exist.



I just read that Al Gore, known for his documentary An Inconvenient Truth, has just admitted that the emission of CO2 is not responsible for global warming and has canceled his conference at the Copenhagen Summit. This is due to fraud of the IPCC and CRU on global warming.



Global warming does not exist. It was all a fraud and the scandal has been called CLIMATEGATE.



The Climategate Scandal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiweBk9RpA



More information in:



Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident (Wikipedia)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_e-mail_hacking_incident



Please read my postscript, there are the emails for the fraud of global warming

______________________________________________________

URGENT: Hackers leak documents confirming farce of climate change

Climate-Gate Pt 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx3q2arm_ek



Gate Weather: Climate change is a fraud, hackers revealed that they had access to files of scientists .



Global warming does not happen by CO2 emissions but by solar activity. Remember the little ice age of 1600.



At the Copenhagen Summit of December 7, 2009 analyzing the carbon tax to reduce CO2 emissions by removing subsidies so carbon (oil, gas and coal). In this way, being so expensive these carbons, people need to reduce consumption of coal, and thus CO2 emissions.



This tax will be the start of the new world order.



Lord Monckton Exposes Man Made Global Warming as a Fraudulent Pretext for Global Taxation 1/3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ1gAxMDyG8&feature=PlayList&p=91076CE1CECADF15&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=57



__________________________________________________________

PostScript(PS).



**VERY IMPORTANT**



You can read the e-mails in this page:



http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php

Answer 9

CO2 is energy

Energy is power

Power is the issue



You are quite correct. The effort should be towards resolving nasty pollution issues.



BUT this does not lead to justifying the MASSIVE wealth transfer & tax increases associated with labeling CO2 a pollutant.



One is spending modest amounts to reuse resources.

The other is control of EVERYONE who uses energy - which is well Everyone.



The issue is the politics of power NOT the efficient use of resources & pleasant environment for us 'little' people.



You must vote for REAL environmentalists NOT these jokers who use environmentalism just to raise taxes.

Answer 10

The issue here is not about science we all know that CO2 is food for the plants and trees..etc..



The main point is the globalist hijackers Hijacked the issue as justification for their personal ugly communistic in nature agendas which is not acceptable for normal law abiding population.



Climate Change is considered a political and economic issue, its no longer a legitimate science isssue.



So we need to remove those Hijackers first before proceeding....

Answer 11

No, I don't think that it is just a matter of renaming. I think it is also partially a matter of denial. Too many people want to deny that they are in any way responsible for the mess that the environment is in now. Some are probably afraid that if they admit their faults, that they are going to get a bill in the mail for damages. Scenario - you turn on a light bulb. The power is partially produced by burning coal. A child downwind of the power plant dies from lung disease. You share the responsibility for his death. The parents hire a lawyer who drags you into court to face up to your crimes against humanity. Not too far fetched is it? We are all guilty and denying it. We are also all guilty of wasting finite resources. Environmental Rescue might be a blanket term, but is too bulky.

Answer 12

Nobody's for pollution; however, CO2 is not a pollutant - without it, virtually all life on earth would shortly cease to exist.

Answer 13

The very question is whether or not Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant. It is no more a pollutant than Oxygen is. Plants require Carbon Dioxide to live.



If you think the country was less polluted before the industrial revolution than it is today, I suggest you visit conditions in any pre-industrial country in the world.



*

Answer 14

We already deal with 'legitimate' pollution. What the Warming cult and politicians desire is to have CO2 declared a pollutant. That is ridiculous!

Answer 15

yeah sure but its just not that simple. You guys buy stuff from third world countries were no rules are for pollution. So you wanna buy cheap and sell it expensive. By doing that you are doing it anyway pollution. It needs to be a global compromise with all countries. But The usa and china was or still is thinking about the economy and that's what is blocking everything. its very complicated and i wished it was just that simple. I dd like to have a green planet for my children

Answer 16

"Climate Change"