How do Moderates view climate change ?

Yep this another where do moderates stand topic I cant help myself .
Now I have asked these questions of Conservatives and I thought that I would put them to moderates and hopefully generate some discussion on this matter. For the record I think that global warming is BS and will lead to taxes being put in place once the the idea of global warming bottoms itself.

Gee I'm beginning to sound like the anti tax brigade that is the American right. : shudders :

So moderates speak out do you think there is a consensus amongst your peers on this matter ?
Where do you stand on this matter ?
This next question is particularly applicable to moderates.
Does anybody think that political ideology rather then facts influence people stance on this matter ?

reply to post by xpert11


Are these questions only applicable to Americans? I think I've got the most moderate view on climate change (at least that I've noticed) on these boards, but I'm not American.

Umm no the questions are open to all ATS members. BTW the author of this thread isnt an American. No matter what the cause is Climate Change is a global problem that needs to be examined.

Okay.

My view on climate change: I think it's a cyclical process, since there is evidence in the ice core to suggest that the Earth goes through phases of cooling and warming. However, I also think it would be extremely naive to believe that the 6.5 billion people living on the planet aren't having an effect on the current phase of the cycle. There is evidence that our activities are affecting climate, from the increase in CO2 to the increase in high altitude cirrus clouds formed by passenger airliners.

So what is the next step then? I believe more research on the subject should be done. There are so many different factors that are worth considering that to pin the blame on humanity and CO2 alone is oversimplifying it. After all, this is climate we are talking about, something that is notoriously difficult to predict and ultimately complex. But that doesn't mean we should go continue living a lifestyle that is environmentally unsound. If we can do something to help the environment or lower our energy consumption, then we should go ahead and do it, so long as it doesn't inconvenience us too much.

As for whether I believe political ideology influences people on this subject more than the facts, well it certainly looks that way to me. I see a lot of people throwing out ALL arguments for anthropological global warming just because Al Gore is a hypocrite and they plain don't like him. And that is truly sad. A case of throwing out the baby (our planet) with the bath water (Gore).

Anyhow, here are some threads of mine on the subject (climate change) that highlights the complex nature of, well, nature:

Carbon dioxide did not end the last Ice Age
Aircraft contrails contributing to global warming?
Planting Trees Doesn't Necessarily Mitigate Global Warming

I'm currently collecting information for a new thread that deals with undersea volcanism and geological activity and it's effects on global climate. It's somewhat harder to gather resources for that one -- there's scarce information and research done on that premise.

I believe it is a cycle the planet goes through, I just don't believe that when the planet is in an ice age that it magicaly disaperes when going into the warming stage. And if we are able to slow down the warming would that cause more harm than good if we are messing with the earths cycle.

Beach has it right. Global warming/cooling is natural and it happens over millenia. The problem, it seems, is we've accelerated the process.
Regardless of whether the threat is legitimate or not, we should still do what we can to cut down on pollutants. It's the healthy thing to do

I agree with the posts above me. I think that we are dealing with the effects of a natural cycle, however I also think that we should do as much as we can to protect the planet and preserve it for the future generations.

I want my kids to be able to breathe clean air, drink clean water and see polar bears. I don't want them to be cleaning up our messes.

If everyone just did a little bit, it would make a big difference. I recycle and use the ugly compact flourescent light bulbs. In fact, most weeks I have only one bag of trash to put out on the curb, but my full-sized recycling bin (I think it's like 64 gallons) is usually as full as it can be. I'd have less trash if I composted.

Doing things like that just makes me feel good. I try to never be preachy when I talk about that stuff with my family and friends, but they all know how I feel, and some have followed my lead.

So there's my answer... but to have you know, my husband says that I am on the liberal side of moderate. What's funny is that his family is incredibly liberal, and they consider me a conservative. My family is extremely conservative, and they call me a liberal. I guess that does make me a moderate.

I've always thought of climate change as having some truth to it, but some of the methods they use to get their data isn't full proof to me. I've always thought of it as something environmentalists can rant on and maybe get in an animal rights deal with it. "Oh climate change it's killing the animals!"

But then there is the weather portion of it.. Which I don;t need facts as I am experiencing it first hand, but it also occurs to me "maybe this is just a cycle in the earths life?".

A moderate is someone who endeavors to apply some logic, based on research and the views of both sides of the issue and then makes a decision on where he stands on that issue.

In the case of the climate, as a moderate, I think that we are better off taking a conservationist view of the environment and hoping for the best.

Climate change is something that has happened since the planet was formed.

The climate we have today is not going to be the climate of the future, as it is not the climate of the past.

Many factors influence climate and for humans to think that we can get a handle on all of them is foolish.

We also need to understand that there have been temporary changes in weather that have looked like climate changes, but in reality were not.

The best approach to climate change is efforts to control our influence on those changes and the ability to adapt when climate changes despite our best effort to forestall those changes.

Remember this.

The same computer models that are used to predict the weather are also used to predict climate change. Following the weather prognostications for a few months ought to give folks an idea of just how accurate the models are when they are trying to predict the long term weather patterns we call climate.

originally posted by xpert11
Yep this another where do moderates stand topic I can’t help myself. Now I have asked these questions of Conservatives and I thought I would put them to moderates and hopefully generate some discussion on this matter. For the record I think that global warming is BS and will lead to taxes being put in place once the idea of global warming bottoms itself.

Gee I'm beginning to sound like the anti tax brigade that is the American right. So moderates speak out (1) do you think there is a consensus amongst your peers on this matter? Where do you stand on this matter? This next question is particularly applicable to moderates. (2)Does anybody think that political ideology rather then facts influence people stance on this matter?

High, Mr X11. First, there is global warming and then there is climate change. I think most atmospheric scientists consider climate change to be a routine pattern of nature, the cause(s) of which are not well understood. Perhaps the perturbations of the earth on its axis cause periodic swings in the climate? Or variations in the output of the Sun. But core samples from the ocean floor and the great Ice sheets confirm it is real.

Global warming. Records are much shorter. Prior to the 1870s, much of the evidence is anecdotal. We do know that human activity has put tons in the power of 12 of atmosphere effecting gases into the atmosphere over the past 200-300 years. To argue this is harmless or has no adverse effect is to look more like an ostrich than a person. I’m not sure how long the carbon dioxide cycle is, but I’m thinking it is more than 50 years. That bodes ill for us when we think of tipping points or thresholds.

1) Yes. I think there is a consensus that it is getting unseasonably warmer, that it is changing and it's not for the better. I stand there.

2) Yes. I think Republicans tend to deny, Democrats tend to affirm. Just as the two groups divide on pay as you go versus put it on the cuff. GOPs tend to be put it on the cuff types, whereas Dems tend to be pay as you go types. Like religion, it is impossible for me to put myself in their frame of mind. I'd like to say "I understand" but I doin't.

[edit on 3/17/2008 by donwhite]