Reducing the Loss of Life
Apart from the science supporting global warming, The U.S. could be a world leader in Hydrogen, Wind and Solar energy technology. Instead, we are the world's great importer of oil, beholden to the Middle East.
No where does science say that Energy and Oil are equivalent in meaning. For the Bush admisistration, Energy MEANS oil and perhaps nuclear power. We are accustomed to oil as an energy source and have built an infrastructure around it, but I believe it has gotten us into trouble.
Is the cost of developing a different infrastructure so outrageous? The U.S. could be a leading energy exporter if we desire. Think of the economic benefits. Think of the health benefits. Think of the reduced military cost and the reduced loss of life. Oh yeah...reducing global warming too. - Gary Santoro
-- While the White House preaches the need for more study, more than "2,000 scientists from across the globe -- contributors to the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- have been in agreement since 1995 that human activities are contributing to worldwide warming. The United States' own National Academy of Sciences reported in 2001 that some of the warming of the Earth's atmosphere over the last 50 years is caused by greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide generated by the burning of fossil fuels. --
The triumph of fringe science. Global warming naysayers argue that we don't need to do anything to stop rising temperatures. Mainstream scientists used to be able to ignore them, but now they make White House policy. [Salon.com]
1:34:27 AM 
|
