• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did the environmentalists of the 20th and 21st centuries end "climate change"?

Josie

*probably reading smut*
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
31,724
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
200 years from now when Americans look back on the 20th and 21st century, will they say that the environmentalists today ended climate change? Let's assume the supposed problem with "climate change" will still be in play in 200 years......people then might say............

Why didn't those environmentalists do everything they possibly could to end it? Why didn't they ban ALL electricity, ALL gasoline, ALL methane gas if they KNEW that those things are causing climate change? They obviously weren't REALLY concerned about the Earth or they would've completely eliminated any and all poisons on our Earth.

The 20th and 21st century environmentalists were just a bunch of Earth-haters who were raping the planet for their own pleasures. Anyone who says they were lovers of our planet are delusional and clearly revising history.
 
If the concept of realism has vanished off the face of the planet, then maybe.
 
I don't know about climate change, but what we are doing to the environment is not good. And I'm not saying the world is going to end etc etc, but pollution is bad, we need to limit it. Also we need to aggressively research and develop alternative energy sources, and wean ourselves off of coal, and oil. Because those things aren't going to last forever, and it's better to get a head start on these things, instead of waiting for the last minute when there is a panic to develop those new technologies, because we are running out of fossil fuels, and the prices for those fuels are at ridiculous levels.
 
I don't know about climate change, but what we are doing to the environment is not good. And I'm not saying the world is going to end etc etc, but pollution is bad, we need to limit it. Also we need to aggressively research and develop alternative energy sources, and wean ourselves off of coal, and oil. Because those things aren't going to last forever, and it's better to get a head start on these things, instead of waiting for the last minute when there is a panic to develop those new technologies, because we are running out of fossil fuels, and the prices for those fuels are at ridiculous levels.

Why don't we completely eliminate everything that's causing climate change RIGHT NOW?
 
Why don't we completely eliminate everything that's causing climate change RIGHT NOW?

Because that would be stupid, and ignorant, because A.) We don't even know if climate change is happening, and if it is, we don't know we are causing it B.) We don't have the tech to replace our energy needs that are being provided by coal and oil.

I'm saying we need to address the issue of coal, and oil being finite, and look for infinite(relatively speaking) sources of energy that don't cause the amount of pollution that coal, and oil emit. Just because doesn't ascribe to the thought that climate change is 100% happening, doesn't mean that we should have to not worry about the effects of pollution. Pollution is bad period, and we need to limit it.
 
Because that would be stupid, and ignorant, because A.) We don't even know if climate change is happening, and if it is, we don't know we are causing it B.) We don't have the tech to replace our energy needs that are being provided by coal and oil.

I'm saying we need to address the issue of coal, and oil being finite, and look for infinite(relatively speaking) sources of energy that don't cause the amount of pollution that coal, and oil emit. Just because doesn't ascribe to the thought that climate change is 100% happening, doesn't mean that we should have to not worry about the effects of pollution. Pollution is bad period, and we need to limit it.

You're "very liberal" and you say we don't even know if climate change is happening or if we're causing it??? Wow.

I need to find another liberal. :)
 
You're "very liberal" and you say we don't even know if climate change is happening or if we're causing it??? Wow.

I need to find another liberal. :)

I don't know why it's a liberal stance to believe in climate change, is it perceived that way because of Al Gore?
 
You're "very liberal" and you say we don't even know if climate change is happening or if we're causing it??? Wow.

I need to find another liberal. :)

It's climatologists who have determined AGW is happening, not liberals. I believe them, however I can't prove it happening. The skeptics are mostly in the fossil fuel industry like Koch Industries.
 
Why don't we completely eliminate everything that's causing climate change RIGHT NOW?

Umm because then we'd be in the technological and economic dark ages for the rest of human history, and it would involve the near-immediate death by starvation of at least 80% of humanity.
 
You're "very liberal" and you say we don't even know if climate change is happening or if we're causing it??? Wow.

I need to find another liberal. :)

You know, there are people who do not fall 100% with their ideological identification. I do believe climate change is occuring and that we are at least partly responsible for it...
 
Now as for Environmentalists ending climate change

Unless somehow extremist environmentalist gain power and stop all greenhouse gas emmisions (man made of course) then no they would not have

What is more likely is something similar CFC production, environmentalists, along with scientists influenced politicians world wide to end/limit the use and production of ozone depleting chemicals. The environmentalists did not end the production/use of CFC, but influenced those that did
 
Another global warming thread? Really? Whatever happened to the old one? I was having fun reading posts standing reason on its head trying to deny scientific research.

The last one ended here.

And no, we can't stop global warming, not by any practical means.
 
Another global warming thread? Really? Whatever happened to the old one? I was having fun reading posts standing reason on its head trying to deny scientific research.

The last one ended here.

And no, we can't stop global warming, not by any practical means.

Not really a global warming thread but a counter thread to the

"Did the founding fathers end slavery" thread
 
Umm because then we'd be in the technological and economic dark ages for the rest of human history, and it would involve the near-immediate death by starvation of at least 80% of humanity.

Absolutely! Now why didn't the Founding Fathers who were anti-slavery work to immediately set free every single slave in America? Why the compromise?
 
I don't know why it's a liberal stance to believe in climate change, is it perceived that way because of Al Gore?

The environmentalist movement of the 1970s gives it the particularly liberal flair.
 
Absolutely! Now why didn't the Founding Fathers who were anti-slavery work to immediately set free every single slave in America? Why the compromise?

...

What in God's name are you talking about? :confused:
 
Last edited:
All kidding aside, Obama has already stated that his inauguration marked the point in time when the world would be healed...when the seas would stop rising.

His words, not mine.

200 years from now when Americans look back on the 20th and 21st century, will they say that the environmentalists today ended climate change? Let's assume the supposed problem with "climate change" will still be in play in 200 years......people then might say............

Why didn't those environmentalists do everything they possibly could to end it? Why didn't they ban ALL electricity, ALL gasoline, ALL methane gas if they KNEW that those things are causing climate change? They obviously weren't REALLY concerned about the Earth or they would've completely eliminated any and all poisons on our Earth.

The 20th and 21st century environmentalists were just a bunch of Earth-haters who were raping the planet for their own pleasures. Anyone who says they were lovers of our planet are delusional and clearly revising history.
 
Theres probably a threshold of greenhouse gasses that affect/do not affect the climate. :shrug: I think the idea of stopping all human activity that requires powered technology is a bit outlandish and likely (likely :roll:) unnecessary to end human caused climate change.
 
Mellie said:
Why don't we completely eliminate everything that's causing climate change RIGHT NOW?

We should, but we can't, unfortunately.
 
Damn it. Aren't these kind of baiting threads against the forum rules? If not, they should be.

No one cares about people's pissing contests outside of the thread in which they originated. Believe it or not, some people actually take the subject of the thread at face value, instead of assuming it's a way for someone to call out someone else and show the whole forum who has the bigger ****.
 
Back
Top Bottom