Do you think the catastrophism about climate change has been exaggerated?
Absolutely not. We are facing a grim future.
No, but the time scale has certainly been misinterpreted. Helping the planet is never a bad idea, it will eventually help itself if we don't help it. Currency is meaningless compared to a global reset.
No. Scientific data can be falsified to serve a goal or purpose, and yes, in some cases it has, by the politicians in order to frighten the masses into believing one bullshit lie or another. But overall? No. It hasn't been.
No, if anything it has been underplayed.
Ask the hurricane and flood victims.
I think it has been underemphasized. The lack of movement by virtually any political leaders anywhere in the world is an enormous moral failing.
No, I believe the catastrophism is merited on scientific hypotheses that has been postulated using non-biased, empirical evidence.
This article is one of the top cited in the field:
Also the Environmental Defense Fund (www.edf/climate) has lots of facts simply merited by research and actual evidence leading to the real effects of climate change. Science isn't the same as story-telling, quite opposite.
Some other non-biased sources, mostly scholarly articles:
World Resources Institute: http://www.wri.org/publication/climate-science?gclid=CPaHkvLh6bICFc2d4AodRh0ApA
Absolutely not. Climate change is all too real. Humans are definitely contributing to the change. However, what mother earth does throughout her history is still not known definitively by us humans and cyclical changes may be necessary for earth to endure with or without humans. Thats just life, the strong survive and the weak perish. The wise learn and grow, the incompetent and indifferent reap what they sow.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
<< PREVIOUS NEXT >>