As one of our remaining points of contention, I will make a brief stand here if you don't mind, sky.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skybird
Why assuming human responsibility is a reasonable thing?
1. It cannot hurt to stop doing things that may cause harm, even if it turns out that they do not. The other way around, it can hurt a damn lot.
|
Actually the economic consequences can be quite harmful. In. the U.S. the EPA has wasted tens of billions of taxpayer dollars and even bulldozed entire communities in the name of environmentalism. Their policies impair the growth of commerce and industry and often have dubious benefits.
While I would agree that some regulation concerning pollution is certainly in order, I think that it needs to be limited. The government has done a poor job of managing it thus far, generating a lot of economic damage for relatively little gain.
Quote:
|
2. Known micro- and macro-cycles of climate developement do not explain the frightening speed at which thinngs are changing. Never before in Earth history things have changed so fast, and so fundamentally. some of the confused attempts to explain why human presence can not be the factor, are simply hair-raising. Acceleration of global change is happening currently at factors reaching into the four digit range. Some processes described run a thousand times faster than ever before in earth hiostory.
|
Oh rly?
And as for the rest of the argument, your logic can be applied in reverse. And often is. Just look at Greenpeace. Giving environmentalists everywhere a bad name with their whacked-out theories and questionable methods.
Something needs to be done, but the debate is not over, and the wrong course of action, whatever it may be, could have far-reaching consequences.