Nobody wants to destroy the environment in the name of progress, but there seems to be no end to the folks that want to destroy progress in the name of the environment.
Why not, indeed.it is an obvious hoax. that said...
even if human life on earth was in peril due to human activity then why not make that case instead of forcing everyone to take care of the danger with taxes/regs/etc.?
Why not, indeed.
One might come to the conclusion that 'saving mankind' isn't really the goal....
Aaaannnnnd...one would be correct!
It is said, and not with a racial overtone, that the radical environmentalists resemble watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside. "Red" meaning "socialist/communist".
After the fall of the Soviet Union and the concurrent discrediting of communism as an economic system, the socialist/communist elites had to find a new movement to hijack, and they selected radical environmentalism as their vehicle for massive wealth distribution.
Not their wealth, of course, but the wealth of the proletariat of the West, chiefly the United States. We pay, the world's poor get even poorer (because fossil fuels are the cheapest and most reliable form of energy production the world has ever known)- and the elites profit. Al Gore has done pretty well for himself, don'cha think?
besides green initiatives invariably including measures which violate private property and individual freedom?Do you have any evidence to back what I interpret to be your claim that the vast majority of scientific consensus is part of some massive communist plot?
Are you saying every single "green initiative", whatever that is, contain measures which violate private property? If so, that's quite a claim and requires evidence.besides green initiatives invariably including measures which violate private property and individual freedom?
well, yes, i kind of am saying that. these 'green initiatives' are not recommendations, sir. they are implemented with force due to their disruption of peaceful and consensual behavior.Are you saying every single "green initiative", whatever that is, contain measures which violate private property? If so, that's quite a claim and requires evidence.
Since every single government regulation violates someone's individual freedom (what do you mean I'm not allowed to rob a bank!), I'll let that slide.
Regardless, your answer hardly answers my question.
Actually, the primary source of oxygen is the amazon region. It is and always has been since we first started studying that aspect of our global climate.
Global warming is no hoax...2 degrees celsius is significant. The only question is whether or not our greenhouse gas emissions are the primary cause. For all we know, it could be a long term climactic cycle that has occurred throughout the history of the planet since the atmosphere was established. We do now know that the northern regions that are primarily arctic now, were once lushes temperate zones where dinosaurs flourished.
I'm no scientist, but I find it hard to believe that all our pollutant production is not affecting the conditions to some degree.