S
smart ass
Гостин
Дебанкирани се и хакери и конспиративци-параноици...доволно е...ЗДРАВЕЈ
Глобално затоплување - нормален период низ кој земјата поминува?
- Креатор на темата P.Griffin
- Време на започнување
- Член од
- 14 декември 2007
- Мислења
- 3.271
- Поени од реакции
- 708
mnogu dobar napis i Poraka
This is James Corbett of corbettreport.com and I come here today with a message for you. You the environmentalists, you the activists, you the campaigners.
You who have watched with growing concern the ways in which the world around us has been ravaged in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.
You who are concerned with the state of the planet that we are leaving for our children and our grandchildren and those generations yet unborn.
This is not a message of divisiveness, but cooperation.
This is a message of hope and empowerment, but it requires us to look at a hard and uncomfortable truth:
Your movement has been usurped by the very same financial interests you thought you were fighting against.
You have suspected as much for years.
You watched at first with hope and excitement as your movement, your cause, your message began to spread, as it was taken up by the media and given attention, as conferences were organized and as the ideas you had struggled so long and hard to be heard were talked about nationally. Then internationally.
You watched with growing unease as the message was simplified. First it became a slogan. Then it became a brand. Soon it was nothing more than a label and it became attached to products. The ideas you had once fought for were now being sold back to you. For profit.
You watched with growing unease as the message became rather than something that came from the conviction of understanding.
You disagreed when the slogans–and then the science–were dumbed down. When carbon dioxide became the focus and CO2 was taken up as a political cause. Soon it was the only cause.
You knew that Al Gore was not a scientist, that his evidence was factually incorrect, that the movement was being taken over by a cause that was not your own, one that relied on beliefs you did not share to propose a solution you did not want. It began to reach a breaking point when you saw that the solutions being proposed were not solutions at all, when they began to propose new taxes and new markets that would only serve to line their own pockets.
You knew something was wrong when you saw them argue for a cap-and-trade scheme proposed by Ken Lay, when you saw Goldman Sachs position itself to ride the carbon trading bubble, when the whole thrust of the movement became ways to make money or spend money or raise money from this panic.
Your movement had been hijacked.
The realization came the first time you read The Club of Rome’s 1991 book, The First Global Revolution, which says:
Last week, an insider leaked internal documents and emails from the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University and exposed the lies, manipulation and fraud behind the studies that supposedly show 0.6 degrees Celsius of warming over the last 130 years. And the hockey stick graph that supposedly shows unprecedented warming in our times. And the alarmist warning of impending climate disaster.
We now know that these scientists wrote programming notes in the source code of their own climate models admitting that results were being manually adjusted.
We now know that values were being adjusted to conform to scientists’ wishes, not reality.
We now know that the peer review process itself was being perverted to exclude those scientists whose work criticized their findings.
We now know that these scientists privately expressed doubts about the science that they publicly claimed to be settled.
We now know, in short, that they were lying.
It is unknown as yet what the fallout will be from all of this, but it is evident that the fallout will be substantial.
With this crisis, however, comes an opportunity. An opportunity to recapture the movement that the financiers have stolen from the people.
Together, we can demand a full and independent investigation into all of the researchers whose work was implicated in the CRU affair.
We can demand a full re-evaluation of all those studies whose conclusions have been thrown into question by these revelations, and all of the public policy that has been based on those studies.
We can establish new standards of transparency for scientists whose work is taxpayer funded and/or whose work effects public policy, so that everyone has full and equal access to the data used to calculate results and all of the source code used in all of the programs used to model that data.
In other words, we can reaffirm that no cause is worth supporting that requires deception for its propagation.
Even more importantly, we can take back the environmental movement.
We can begin to concentrate on the serious questions that need to be asked about the genetic engineering technology whereby hybrid organisms and new, never-before-seen proteins that are being released into the biosphere in a giant, uncontrolled experiment that threatens the very genome of life on this planet.
We can look into the environmental causes of the explosion in cancer and the staggering drops in fertility over the last 50 years, including the BPA in our plastics and the anti-androgens in the water.
We can examine regulatory agencies that are controlled by the very corporations they are supposedly watching over.
We can begin focusing on depleted uranium and the dumping of toxic waste into the rivers and all of the issues that we once knew were part of the mandate of the real environmental movement.
Or we can, as some have, descend into petty partisan politics. We can decide that lies are OK if they support ‘our’ side. We can defend the reprehensible actions of the CRU researchers and rally around the green flag that has long since been captured by the enemy.
It is a simple decision to make, but one that we must make quickly, before the argument can be spun away and environmentalism can go back to business as usual.
We are at a crossroads of history. And make no mistake, history will be the final judge of our actions. So I leave you today with a simple question: Which side of history do you want to be on?
http://www.infowars.com/a-message-to-the-environmental-movement-your-movement-has-been-hijacked/
celiot napis na video
This is James Corbett of corbettreport.com and I come here today with a message for you. You the environmentalists, you the activists, you the campaigners.
You who have watched with growing concern the ways in which the world around us has been ravaged in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.
You who are concerned with the state of the planet that we are leaving for our children and our grandchildren and those generations yet unborn.
This is not a message of divisiveness, but cooperation.
This is a message of hope and empowerment, but it requires us to look at a hard and uncomfortable truth:
Your movement has been usurped by the very same financial interests you thought you were fighting against.
You have suspected as much for years.
You watched at first with hope and excitement as your movement, your cause, your message began to spread, as it was taken up by the media and given attention, as conferences were organized and as the ideas you had struggled so long and hard to be heard were talked about nationally. Then internationally.
You watched with growing unease as the message was simplified. First it became a slogan. Then it became a brand. Soon it was nothing more than a label and it became attached to products. The ideas you had once fought for were now being sold back to you. For profit.
You watched with growing unease as the message became rather than something that came from the conviction of understanding.
You disagreed when the slogans–and then the science–were dumbed down. When carbon dioxide became the focus and CO2 was taken up as a political cause. Soon it was the only cause.
You knew that Al Gore was not a scientist, that his evidence was factually incorrect, that the movement was being taken over by a cause that was not your own, one that relied on beliefs you did not share to propose a solution you did not want. It began to reach a breaking point when you saw that the solutions being proposed were not solutions at all, when they began to propose new taxes and new markets that would only serve to line their own pockets.
You knew something was wrong when you saw them argue for a cap-and-trade scheme proposed by Ken Lay, when you saw Goldman Sachs position itself to ride the carbon trading bubble, when the whole thrust of the movement became ways to make money or spend money or raise money from this panic.
Your movement had been hijacked.
The realization came the first time you read The Club of Rome’s 1991 book, The First Global Revolution, which says:
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
And when you looked at the Club of Rome’s elite member roster. And when you learnt about eugenics and the Rockefeller ties to the Kaiser Willhelm Institute and the practice of crypto-eugenics and the rise of overpopulation fearmongering and the call by elitist after elitist after elitist to cull the world population.
- A d v e r t i s e m e n t
- Still, you wanted to believe that there was some basis of truth, something real and valuable in the single-minded obsession of this hijacked environmental movement with manmade global warming.
Last week, an insider leaked internal documents and emails from the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University and exposed the lies, manipulation and fraud behind the studies that supposedly show 0.6 degrees Celsius of warming over the last 130 years. And the hockey stick graph that supposedly shows unprecedented warming in our times. And the alarmist warning of impending climate disaster.
We now know that these scientists wrote programming notes in the source code of their own climate models admitting that results were being manually adjusted.
We now know that values were being adjusted to conform to scientists’ wishes, not reality.
We now know that the peer review process itself was being perverted to exclude those scientists whose work criticized their findings.
We now know that these scientists privately expressed doubts about the science that they publicly claimed to be settled.
We now know, in short, that they were lying.
It is unknown as yet what the fallout will be from all of this, but it is evident that the fallout will be substantial.
With this crisis, however, comes an opportunity. An opportunity to recapture the movement that the financiers have stolen from the people.
Together, we can demand a full and independent investigation into all of the researchers whose work was implicated in the CRU affair.
We can demand a full re-evaluation of all those studies whose conclusions have been thrown into question by these revelations, and all of the public policy that has been based on those studies.
We can establish new standards of transparency for scientists whose work is taxpayer funded and/or whose work effects public policy, so that everyone has full and equal access to the data used to calculate results and all of the source code used in all of the programs used to model that data.
In other words, we can reaffirm that no cause is worth supporting that requires deception for its propagation.
Even more importantly, we can take back the environmental movement.
We can begin to concentrate on the serious questions that need to be asked about the genetic engineering technology whereby hybrid organisms and new, never-before-seen proteins that are being released into the biosphere in a giant, uncontrolled experiment that threatens the very genome of life on this planet.
We can look into the environmental causes of the explosion in cancer and the staggering drops in fertility over the last 50 years, including the BPA in our plastics and the anti-androgens in the water.
We can examine regulatory agencies that are controlled by the very corporations they are supposedly watching over.
We can begin focusing on depleted uranium and the dumping of toxic waste into the rivers and all of the issues that we once knew were part of the mandate of the real environmental movement.
Or we can, as some have, descend into petty partisan politics. We can decide that lies are OK if they support ‘our’ side. We can defend the reprehensible actions of the CRU researchers and rally around the green flag that has long since been captured by the enemy.
It is a simple decision to make, but one that we must make quickly, before the argument can be spun away and environmentalism can go back to business as usual.
We are at a crossroads of history. And make no mistake, history will be the final judge of our actions. So I leave you today with a simple question: Which side of history do you want to be on?
http://www.infowars.com/a-message-to-the-environmental-movement-your-movement-has-been-hijacked/
celiot napis na video
S
smart ass
Гостин
Денес во светот имаме потенцијал да ја уништиме биосферата 6000 пати,и тоа само со атомско оружје...за ВХ,G-type-да не зборам...
И не станува збор за враќање во нелкаква нормала,имено имало варијации во температиурата но не со ваков интензитет,кој и делува мутагено дури
еве ти инфо од повеќе истражувачки институти-ова е едноставно..и ХОРДАТ ќе го свати
Очигледно нормалата варира негде -1 до-о.5 но мпосле втора светтска војна настана втората индустриска евлуција...жедта за нафта се зголеми а тогаш регулативите беа слаби...ова што е оџзначено како аномалија самото зборува за себе...дека не е НОРМАЛНО-туку под дејство на човекот,човек убаво ви објасни на кој начин ќе помогнат пигуевите даноци кон редукција на загадувањето а воедно и санација наштетите од истото-Бидејќи парите од истиот данок ќе одат за санирање на евентуалните штети,како и за подобрување на животната средина...ете во бостон се планира подземја да се направи автопатна мрежа,а "горе" наместо аасфалт ќе има паркови,училишта...тоа ќе биде од данокот на загадувачите.
И на крај краеви иако индиректен трошок врз индустријата повеќето претпријатија се адаптираа инвестирајќи во нова технологија која редуцира СО2,значи башка инвестивции+поефикасен и порентабилен производствен процес.
Ете Процени сам колку штета има направено РЕК битола или други ТЕЦ кои користат јаглен(дали е кокс или антрацит..не е важно)...земи работен век 30 години и ќе добиеш 50 тона СО2 и фазла.
Зошто автомобилските компании почитуваат стандарди,зошто се ориентираат кон Хибридни возила...СВЕСТА...НЕ ИНАТОТ вториот е магарешка особина но го има и кај луѓе за жал.......
Во прилог на изнесето одат следниве факти
How permit auction revenue would be spent
About 15 percent of the pollution permits would be sold by the federal government in the initial years of the program. Here’s how the revenue would be spent (shown as a percentage of the value of all permits):
ИНВЕСТИЦИИТЕ...како што и тврдев
Investments in energy technology
By 2025, the bill would direct an estimated total of $190 billion to energy technologies and efficiency measures:
И не станува збор за враќање во нелкаква нормала,имено имало варијации во температиурата но не со ваков интензитет,кој и делува мутагено дури
еве ти инфо од повеќе истражувачки институти-ова е едноставно..и ХОРДАТ ќе го свати
Очигледно нормалата варира негде -1 до-о.5 но мпосле втора светтска војна настана втората индустриска евлуција...жедта за нафта се зголеми а тогаш регулативите беа слаби...ова што е оџзначено како аномалија самото зборува за себе...дека не е НОРМАЛНО-туку под дејство на човекот,човек убаво ви објасни на кој начин ќе помогнат пигуевите даноци кон редукција на загадувањето а воедно и санација наштетите од истото-Бидејќи парите од истиот данок ќе одат за санирање на евентуалните штети,како и за подобрување на животната средина...ете во бостон се планира подземја да се направи автопатна мрежа,а "горе" наместо аасфалт ќе има паркови,училишта...тоа ќе биде од данокот на загадувачите.
И на крај краеви иако индиректен трошок врз индустријата повеќето претпријатија се адаптираа инвестирајќи во нова технологија која редуцира СО2,значи башка инвестивции+поефикасен и порентабилен производствен процес.
Ете Процени сам колку штета има направено РЕК битола или други ТЕЦ кои користат јаглен(дали е кокс или антрацит..не е важно)...земи работен век 30 години и ќе добиеш 50 тона СО2 и фазла.
Зошто автомобилските компании почитуваат стандарди,зошто се ориентираат кон Хибридни возила...СВЕСТА...НЕ ИНАТОТ вториот е магарешка особина но го има и кај луѓе за жал.......
Во прилог на изнесето одат следниве факти
How permit auction revenue would be spent
About 15 percent of the pollution permits would be sold by the federal government in the initial years of the program. Here’s how the revenue would be spent (shown as a percentage of the value of all permits):
- 15 percent would be used to offset increased energy costs for low- and moderate-income households
- 5 percent would be used to prevent international deforestation, scaling back to 3 percent from 2026 to 2030 and 2 percent from 2031 to 2050
- 2 percent would be used to help the U.S. Adapt to the negative effects of climate change from 2012 through 2021, scaling up to 4 percent from 2022 through 2026 and 8 percent thereafter; half would be spent onwildlife and natural resources and the other half on other adaptation concerns, like public health
- 1.5 percent would be used to support research and development of advanced clean-energy and energy-efficiency technologies
- 1 percent would go to help other nations adapt to climate change from 2012 through 2021, scaling up to 4 percent from 2027 to 2050
- 1 percent would go to international clean-technology deployment from 2012 to 2021, scaling up to 4 percent from 2027 to 2050
- 0.5 percent would be used to help U.S. workerstransition away from fossil fuel-dependent industries from 2012 through 2021, scaling up to 1 percent from 2022 to 2050
ИНВЕСТИЦИИТЕ...како што и тврдев
Investments in energy technology
By 2025, the bill would direct an estimated total of $190 billion to energy technologies and efficiency measures:
- $90 billion to energy-efficiency and renewable-energy technologies
- $60 billion to carbon-capture-and-sequestration technology
- $20 billion to electric vehicles and other advanced automotive technologies
- $20 billion for basic scientific research and development
Дебанкирани се и хакери и конспиративци-параноици...доволно е...ЗДРАВЕЈ
- Член од
- 14 декември 2007
- Мислења
- 3.271
- Поени од реакции
- 708
@Dule@
Бананамен )))
- Член од
- 24 ноември 2009
- Мислења
- 119
- Поени од реакции
- 1
КОЈА ЛАГА НА ВЕКОТ БРЕЕ ВИЕ НЕ ЗНАЕТЕ ШТО ЗБОРИТЕ
ПОРАНО СЕ ПИЕЛО ВОДА ОД ВАРДАР И СЕ БАЊАЛЕ ЛУЃЕТО ВО НЕГО СЕГА БАШ ИМАМ СЛУШНАТО И ПРИКАЗНА КАКО ВИСТИНИТА НА НЕКОЈ РИБАР МУ СЕ СТОПИЛЕ ЧИЗМИТЕ ЗА ВО ВОДА.
ОЗОНСКАТА ДУПКА ОДЕТЕ СЕГА ЛЕТНО ВРЕМЕ БИДЕТЕ НА СОНЦЕ ОД 11 и 30 ДО 16 ЧАСОТ КЕ ВИ ПУКНЕ ГЛАВАТА НИКОГАШ НЕ БИЛО КАКО СЕГА ЈАКО СОНЦЕТО
СЕ Е ТОА ОД ВОЈНИ ОД ЗАГАДЕНОСТ ОД ЛУЃЕТО
7 МИЛИЈАРДИ ПОПУЛАЦИЈА СМЕ СО ИСТОТ ТОЛКУ ВОЗИЛА ФАБРИКИ
ФАРМНИ НА ГОВЕДА КОИ ПРОИЗВЕДУВААТ ЈАГЛЕРОДЕН ДИОКСИД КАКО ЦЕЛА ЧОВЕЧКА ПОПУЛАЦИЈА
НЕМА ВРСКА ДЕКА Е ЛАГА
ГЛОБАЛНОТО ЗАТОПЛУВАЊЕ Е ФАКТ !!!
ПОРАНО СЕ ПИЕЛО ВОДА ОД ВАРДАР И СЕ БАЊАЛЕ ЛУЃЕТО ВО НЕГО СЕГА БАШ ИМАМ СЛУШНАТО И ПРИКАЗНА КАКО ВИСТИНИТА НА НЕКОЈ РИБАР МУ СЕ СТОПИЛЕ ЧИЗМИТЕ ЗА ВО ВОДА.
ОЗОНСКАТА ДУПКА ОДЕТЕ СЕГА ЛЕТНО ВРЕМЕ БИДЕТЕ НА СОНЦЕ ОД 11 и 30 ДО 16 ЧАСОТ КЕ ВИ ПУКНЕ ГЛАВАТА НИКОГАШ НЕ БИЛО КАКО СЕГА ЈАКО СОНЦЕТО
СЕ Е ТОА ОД ВОЈНИ ОД ЗАГАДЕНОСТ ОД ЛУЃЕТО
7 МИЛИЈАРДИ ПОПУЛАЦИЈА СМЕ СО ИСТОТ ТОЛКУ ВОЗИЛА ФАБРИКИ
ФАРМНИ НА ГОВЕДА КОИ ПРОИЗВЕДУВААТ ЈАГЛЕРОДЕН ДИОКСИД КАКО ЦЕЛА ЧОВЕЧКА ПОПУЛАЦИЈА
НЕМА ВРСКА ДЕКА Е ЛАГА
ГЛОБАЛНОТО ЗАТОПЛУВАЊЕ Е ФАКТ !!!
Синдикат
Мајгада?!
- Член од
- 22 август 2005
- Мислења
- 3.110
- Поени од реакции
- 180
- Возраст
- 38
Зошто се бламираш бе чоек? Одмори малце.
Загаденост на река и озонска дупка ми споредваш со глобално затоплување. Немој вакви екцеси се срамиш.
Human
Explorer
- Член од
- 10 октомври 2009
- Мислења
- 12.650
- Поени од реакции
- 5.349
Факт е ама некои не гледаат така, за жал...
- Член од
- 8 април 2008
- Мислења
- 6.419
- Поени од реакции
- 777
оти е факт ... оти ти и паметниотГз така мислите?
ја викам не е Факт ... ама некои не гледаат за жал ...
и сеа кој е у право ...
и земјата беше плоча - и Тоа беше ФАКТ
па сега не е
Human
Explorer
- Член од
- 10 октомври 2009
- Мислења
- 12.650
- Поени од реакции
- 5.349
оти е факт ... оти ти и паметниотГз така мислите?
ја викам не е Факт ... ама некои не гледаат за жал ...
и сеа кој е у право ...
и земјата беше плоча - и Тоа беше ФАКТ
па сега не е
Постојат докази! Затоа е ФАКТ!
А за тоа дали Земјата била плоча не знам да постоеле докази.
@Dule@
Бананамен )))
- Член од
- 24 ноември 2009
- Мислења
- 119
- Поени од реакции
- 1
))))) Абе се срамам пред такви како тебе што мислат спротивно од мене така ))))
Озонската дупка ја имало и порано да така , во Вардар и други реки ширум светот пливале гомна а во некој и цијанит и радијација така ))
ОД секогаш било сонцето така јако и карциномно/
ПА од тука и потекнува глобалното затоплување од озонските дупки се зголемува температурата на целата земја кое бламирање за какво срамење ми зборуваш/
Огромни промени прави човекот
Ајде ако продолжите да се спротиставувавате со задоволство ке ископам материјали со докази научни колку и како се влијае човекот врз целата планета и глобалното затоплување.
Human
Explorer
- Член од
- 10 октомври 2009
- Мислења
- 12.650
- Поени од реакции
- 5.349
Штом ти така викаш, тогаш така нека биди...
Синдикат
Мајгада?!
- Член од
- 22 август 2005
- Мислења
- 3.110
- Поени од реакции
- 180
- Возраст
- 38
:pos2::pos2::pos2::pos2::pos2:
Озонската дупка влијаела со затоплувањето!!! :kesa::kesa::kesa:
Абе аман леле, дај барем прочитај пред да се топориш.
Напишано од @Dule@
ПА од тука и потекнува глобалното затоплување од озонските дупки се зголемува температурата на целата земја кое бламирање за какво срамење ми зборуваш/
Огромни промени прави човекот
Ајде ако продолжите да се спротиставувавате со задоволство ке ископам материјали со докази научни колку и како се влијае човекот врз целата планета и глобалното затоплување.
Еј ај да не претеруваме.....озонските дупки....:pos2:
Ако допрва почнеш да копаш.....материјали.........далеку ќе стигнеме....:pos2:
@Dule@
Бананамен )))
- Член од
- 24 ноември 2009
- Мислења
- 119
- Поени од реакции
- 1
“The catastrophic floods and severe storms we are now experiencing will become more frequent.”
—THOMAS LOSTER, A WEATHER RISKS SPECIALIST.
IS SOMETHING really wrong with the weather? Many fear that there is. Meteorologist Dr. Peter Werner from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research says: "When we observe global weather—the extremes in precipitation, floods, droughts, storms—and note its development, we can rightly say that these extremes have quadrupled over the last 50 years."—THOMAS LOSTER, A WEATHER RISKS SPECIALIST.
Many feel that the unusual weather patterns are evidence of global warming—the so-called greenhouse effect run amok. Explains the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: "The greenhouse effect is the rise in temperature that the Earth experiences because certain gases in the atmosphere (water vapor, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane, for example) trap energy from the sun. Without these gases, heat would escape back into space and Earth's average temperature would be about 60°F colder."
Many charge, however, that man has unwittingly tampered with this natural process. Says an article in Earth Observatory, an on-line publication of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration: "For decades human factories and cars have spewed billions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere . . . Many scientists fear that the increased concentrations of greenhouse gases have prevented additional thermal radiation from leaving the Earth. In essence, these gases are trapping excess heat in the Earth's atmosphere in much the same way that a windshield traps solar energy that enters a car."
Skeptics point out that only a small percentage of greenhouse gas emissions are man-made. However, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a research group that is sponsored by both the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, reports: "There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities."
Climatologist Pieter Tans of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says: "If I had to put a figure on it, I would say that it is 60 percent our fault . . . The remaining 40 percent is due to natural causes."
“There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities”
Possible Consequences of Global Warming
What, then, has been the apparent result of the buildup of man-made greenhouse gases? Most scientists now agree that the earth has indeed heated up. Just how dramatic has this temperature rise been? The 2001 IPCC report says: "Global surface temperatures have increased between 0.4 and 0.8°C since the late 19th century." Many researchers believe that this small rise could account for the dramatic changes in our weather.
Admittedly, the earth's weather system is astonishingly complex, and scientists cannot state with certainty what—if any—the effects of global warming are. However, many believe that as a result of global warming, there has been increased rainfall in the Northern Hemisphere, drought in Asia and Africa, and escalating El Niño events in the Pacific.
An article in Scientific American raised this intriguing question. It predicted that global warming "will expand the incidence and distribution of many serious medical disorders." For example, in some places "the number of deaths related to heat waves is projected to double by 2020."
Less obvious is the role global warming could play in infectious disease. "Mosquito-borne disorders are projected to become increasingly prevalent," since mosquitoes "proliferate faster and bite more as the air becomes warmer. . . . As whole areas heat up, then, mosquitoes could expand into formerly forbidden territories, bringing illness with them."
Finally, there are the effects of flood and drought—both of which can result in polluted water supplies. Clearly, the threat of global warming must be taken seriously.
Needed—A Global Solution
Since many view this problem as man-made, cannot man solve the problem? A number of communities have already enacted laws to limit pollution emissions from cars and factories. However, such efforts—commendable as they are—have had little or no impact. Pollution is a global problem, so the solution would have to be global! In 1992 the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro was convened. Ten years later, in Johannesburg, South Africa, the World Summit on Sustainable Development was held. Some 40,000 delegates attended this meeting in 2002, including about 100 national leaders.
Such conferences have done much to bring about a general consensus among scientists. The German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel explains: "Whereas most scientists back then [in 1992] had their doubts about the greenhouse effect, it goes practically unquestioned today." Even so, Germany's environment minister, Jürgen Trittin, reminds us that the real solution to the problem has still not been found. "Johannesburg must therefore be not only a summit of words," he stressed, "but also a summit of action."
Can Environmental Damage Be Halted?
Global warming is just one of many environmental challenges facing mankind. Taking effective action may be far easier said than done. "Now that we have finally faced up to the terrible damage we have inflicted on our environment," writes British ethologist Jane Goodall, "our ingenuity is working overtime to find technological solutions." But she cautions: "Technology alone is not enough. We must engage with our hearts also."
Consider again the problem of global warming. Antipollution measures are costly; often, poorer nations simply cannot afford them. Some experts thus fear that energy restrictions will send industries fleeing to poorer lands where they can operate more profitably. Even the best-intentioned leaders, therefore, find themselves caught in a bind. If they protect their nations' economic interests, the environment suffers. If they push for environmental protection, they endanger the economy.
Severn Cullis-Suzuki, of the World Summit advisory panel, therefore argues that change must come through individual action, saying: "Real environmental change depends on us. We can't wait for our leaders. We have to focus on what our own responsibilities are and how we can make the change happen."
It is only reasonable to expect people to behave with respect for the environment. But getting people to make needed changes in their life-styles is not so easy. To illustrate: Most people agree that automobiles contribute to global warming. Hence, an individual may want to cut back on driving or do without an automobile completely. But doing so may not be so easy. As Wolfgang Sachs from the Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, and Energy recently pointed out, "all the places that play a role in daily life (workplace, kindergarten, school, or shopping center) lie so far apart that you cannot manage without a car. . . . Whether I personally want a car or not has nothing to do with it. Most folks simply have no choice."
Some scientists, such as Professor Robert Dickinson of the Georgia Institute of Technology's School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, fear that it might already be too late to spare earth from the consequences of global warming. Dickinson believes that even if pollution ceased today, the effects of past abuses to the atmosphere would still last for at least another 100 years!
Since neither governments nor individuals can solve the problems of the environment, who can? From ancient times, people have looked to the heavens for help in controlling the weather. As naive as such efforts were, they do reveal a basic truth: Mankind needs divine help to solve these problems.
И ова другово се вклопува со оваа тема
The patient's condition is serious. Symptoms are multiple. His breath is noxious. He has a fever, higher than ever before. Efforts to bring it down are not working. Poison has been found in body fluids. When symptoms are treated in one area, more pop up in other body parts. If this were a usual patient, doctors would be inclined to declare the multiple sicknesses as chronic and terminal. Not knowing what else to do, they would just take steps to make the patient as comfortable as possible until the end came.
HOWEVER, this is not a human patient. It is our home—the earth. The above scenario well illustrates what is happening to our planet. Dirty air, global warming, polluted waters, and toxic wastes are just a few of the maladies of our very ill earth. Like the doctors mentioned above, the experts are in a quandary as to what to do.
The media regularly call attention to earth's poor health with such headlines and captions as: "Blast fishing turns seabeds into killing fields." A "Billion Asians Could Be Parched in 24 Years." "Forty million tons of toxic trash a year trades globally." "Nearly two thirds of the 1,800 wells in Japan are contaminated with poisons." "Ozone Hole Over Antarctic Is Back and Bigger."
Some people become accustomed to frequent news of danger to the environment, perhaps even thinking, 'That is not of great concern as long as it does not affect me.' However, whether we realize it or not, the wholesale destruction of the earth's environment affects the vast majority of people. Since contamination of our planet is now so pervasive, it likely already affects more than one aspect of our lives. Thus, all should be concerned about the health and preservation of our home. After all, where else would we live?
Just how widespread is the problem? How sick is the earth? How are people's lives affected? Let us take a look at just a few factors that help us to understand why our earth is not just mildly indisposed but, instead, seriously ill.
THE OCEANS: Large sections of ocean are overfished. A report by the United Nations Environment Programme says that "70 percent of marine fisheries are so exploited that reproduction cannot or can just barely keep up." For example, populations of cod, hake, haddock, and flounder in the North Atlantic fell by as much as 95 percent between 1989 and 1994. If this continues, what will it mean for millions who depend on the sea as a major source of their food?
Additionally, each year an estimated 20 million to 40 million tons of sea life are caught and thrown back into the ocean—usually wounded or dead. Why? They are caught along with target fish but are not wanted.
FORESTS: Deforestation has many negative sides to it. Loss of trees results in a reduction in the earth's capacity to absorb carbon dioxide, and this is said to be a cause of global warming. Certain species of plants, the potential source of lifesaving medicines, will disappear. Nevertheless, forest destruction continues unabated. In fact, the rate of destruction has increased in recent years. Some authorities feel that if this persists, tropical forests could disappear in about 20 years.
TOXIC WASTES: Dumping of harmful materials both on land and in the sea is a serious problem that has the potential for bringing great harm to millions. Radioactive wastes, heavy metals, and by-products of plastics are among elements that can cause abnormalities, sickness, or death in humans and animals.
CHEMICALS: During the past 100 years, close to 100,000 new chemicals have come into use. These chemicals find their way into our air, soil, water, and food. Relatively few of them have been tested for their health effects on humans. However, of the ones that have, a significant number have been found to be carcinogenic or to cause disease in other ways.
There are many more threats to our environment: air pollution, untreated sewage, acid rain, lack of clean water. The few already mentioned suffice to show that the earth is really sick.
