Global warming -> Huge detrimental effects. Will somebody PLEASE point out to me where the "huge detrimental effects" are? The rules of the game:
1. A species going extinct is *not* a huge detrimental effect, as 99.9% of all species have gone extinct over the course of global history (http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/courses/EEB105/lectures/extinction/extinction.html) -- meaning, given man's relatively short duration on the planet, and shorter duration of "civilization", man is *hardly* the cause of species extinction.
2. A region of the planet changing it's general temperature profile is not a huge detrimental effect -- since Michigan was carved out of the earth by a glacier...and is no longer covered by a glacier...and this happened before man was supposedly ruining the planet...it is clear that the earth can go in to and out of temperature extremes on it's own AND that these temperature swings do not "destroy" the region.
3. Discomfort to human beings can not be considered a huge detrimental effect since the focus of the discussion is *the planet*, not humans, who are generally derided by global warming extremists and seen as parasites to the planet, and therefore worthy of suffering, even to the point where their elimination is seen as a net positive to the whole of existence.
Soooo...I'm still waiting to see where global warming is a bad thing, rather than simple "A THING". I'm still waiting to see ANY evidence by which global warming can *rationally* be said to be 1. Man made, and 2. "spiraling out of control" to the literal destruction of the planet and all life contained therein.
If mankind dies, how is this a bad thing? The general (I'd argue well over 50%) of global warming advocates are Evolutionists, and as such consider man just another thing that happens on the planet. We have no special claim to the earth, nor do we hold any special claim to the "right" to life. As such, given that 99.9% of all species aren't here any more, it is the natural conclusion that man, as well, must come to an end. This is not a bad thing...it is "A THING", without moral implications.
So, evolutionary global warming advocates...please tell me how, even if man causes global warming, it is a bad thing, rather than just "A THING" I believe that your attachment to the status quo is verging on religion, as is your insistence (implied) that man must live forever. I believe neither the current climatic conditions, nor the existence of man, are special in any way that would lead me to believe they must exist forever...and in fact, science tells us someday the sun will burn out, flare out, blow up, fade away...whatever...and we will die. Period.
Thus, all told, global warming hysteria is a joke at best and (wait for it...) blatant hypocrisy on the part of ungodly evolutionists that ought to see man's existence as meaningless (and any creature for that matter), and the earth just a freak accident which is a mere blip in universal time.
Get over yourselves.
Politicians not doing what they are supposed to be experts at
98kyu.gif
)
)
)
)