Fri, Dec. 7th, 2007, 06:10 pm
Today, during the class discussion portion of History of Modern China, one of my classmates boldly explained that he thought that global warming was fictional, devised by first-world nations to keep third-world nations down.
Sat, Dec. 8th, 2007 05:33 am (UTC)
Sat, Dec. 8th, 2007 11:57 pm (UTC)
That doesn't make any sense :P
As for the actual truth of it, I'm of two minds really. Because some of the data doesn't jibe...but thats just me. I also think that if it IS true, there isn't a damned thing we can do NOW to stop its progression.
Mon, Dec. 10th, 2007 07:29 am (UTC)
What really got me was that he percieved all of the different research as somehow all being orchestrated for one nefarious (and stupid, if you think about it) purpose. This is a junior in college who said this. On the other hand, he's a History major, whom haven't shown much criticality to me during my time as a History minor.
Thu, Dec. 13th, 2007 10:02 pm (UTC)
Funny thing is that the first-world nations are causing the greenhouse gasses and all that in the first place. Exactly what does third-world countries have to do with global warming, other than that the hole in the ozone layer being over somewhere in...where is it again, Africa?
Fri, Dec. 14th, 2007 04:57 am (UTC)
Preventable ozone layer deterioration is caused primarily by released CFCs and HCFCs. Laws were passed and enforced worldwide during the 1990s. In the US, we have the federal Clean Air Act, which is enforced by the EPA. Since then, the ozone layer situation is (mostly) under control.
Global warming is entirely different. It's a documented effect: the world's average temperture is going up, and although there is a global cooling/warming cycle, there is sufficient evidence that the activities of humans are influencing the cycle in a perturbing way. Carbon emmissions and other factors are very possible culprits.
"Third world" countries are the industrial workhorses of the world now. Any action to limit carbon emmisions is likely to affect those nations more than the rest of the world. This is why the Kyoto Protocol, for instance, sets different standards for different countries.
My contemporary took the bizzarre opinion that the Western powers fabricated it all just so that ways the "third world countries" could... I don't know, produce less? It makes less and less sense the more you think about it.
Fri, Dec. 14th, 2007 06:44 am (UTC)
I see what you mean. It seems to me that everything in the world is making less and less sense these days...
Fri, Dec. 14th, 2007 10:21 am (UTC)
That's strange. It seems to make more and more sense to me these days...
I must be like some sort of vampire or something. 0_o
Wed, Dec. 26th, 2007 07:55 pm (UTC)
Some things I just don't get: Why can't we have MMORPG sessions instead of wars? Why is oil so important if we're looking for alternatives to fossil fuels?
Thu, Dec. 27th, 2007 07:54 am (UTC)
Well, MMORPGs haven't been a part of our political history for very long. Also, war is just the most visible form of macro-conflict. There's lots of conflict on any MMORPG, regardless of servers or anything.
One of the reasons alternative fuel sources are being researched so heavily right now is that oil is
so important, and will grow more important as it becomes ever more scarce and difficult to obtain.
Mon, Jan. 7th, 2008 02:48 am (UTC)
Oddly enough, that appears to be Ron Paul's position, substituting "the UN" or "Europe", and "the US".
Mon, Jan. 7th, 2008 03:36 am (UTC)
The more I come to understand the man, the more his popularity baffles me.
Mon, Jan. 7th, 2008 05:08 pm (UTC)
My guess is it's partially his opposition to continuing the deadly folly of Iraq, permitting Republicans against the war to express their feeling without having to vote Dem, and partially that he's not quite as insane as the others - there must, surely, be Republicans who know full well that torture is
wrong (and that waterboarding was prosecuted as a war crime in the aftermath of WW2), and Guantanamo Bay isn't any grand beacon of liberty in need of expansion rather than closure.
I shan't comment on how people expect the national debt to be reduced if the IRS were to be eliminated - voluntary donations, perhaps, or greatly increasing expenditure based taxation.