What do you think of MMGW?

mkpdavies · 12-11-2007, 08:41 PM

Where do you stand?

Multiple choices are allowed.

Smidgey · 12-11-2007, 09:25 PM

I voted the second and third options, but to qualify, by 'cut' and 'we', I mean the free market - not the government.

Anthony Smithee · 12-11-2007, 09:43 PM

Just to clarify, I don't believe it will be beneficial. I think we're having an effect, but I don't believe that CO2 is the primary cause. I do think we should try to cut down on emissions, but we should give priority to other issues first.

Anthony Butcher · 13-11-2007, 12:15 AM

I voted 'Don't know, but I think we should cut CO2, just in case'. I haven't read a vast amount on it, but I have read sufficient amounts to put me in the position of not accepting either side as providing a sufficiently robust argument. However, since I don't think that anyone knows for sure, I think that we should err on the side of caution and take reasonable steps.

The downside of doing nothing and being proven wrong is potentially too high to risk, IMHO.

This is slightly off topic, but related; I don't think that it will do us any harm to cut pollution generally either. When I used to come home after work in London, I would often have black snot (sorry for being vulgar) just from the pollution in the air; that can't be healthy. I certainly wouldn't bring up my children in a city if I could help it.

rjt · 13-11-2007, 08:29 AM

I feel we should concentrate on other more proven issues, far more discussion needs to be had on this issue, from what I have read on this forum though people who do beleive in it have no time for any contary opinons arrogantely proclaiming there views under a banner of so called established science.

MMGW will not feature as a prominant issue at the next election.

mkpdavies · 13-11-2007, 09:23 AM

I'm for finding more ways of creating energy and being more efficient with the resources we have.

That CO2 would fall because of that is just a side issue for me. I certainly won't ever back any taxation or removals of freedoms off the back of it.

Smidgey · 13-11-2007, 10:00 AM

Yes, CO2 will fall to market pressures.

Oil will eventually run out, same with gas - a replacement is needed and by the looks of things, hydrogen cars and nuclear power plants (maybe eventually fusion) are the way to go. People who don't believe in MMGW and those who do will also buy more efficient energy consuming items for their homes (such as long life lightbulbs) because they save money by doing so. The same is true of insulating ones home and so forth.

The benefits of doing these things in a free market are much better than having the government do them and whether you believe in MMGW or not is not important, technology has always improved our environment. Could you imagine the London congestion if we all still rode horses? The streets would be full of ****.

NoMoreEUSSR · 14-11-2007, 02:20 AM

I plump for (4) and (5), what with being an honest in-duh-vidual and all.

View Poll Results: Man Made Global Warming With CO2. Is it?
The truth. CO2 made by man is warming up the planet and it will destory us if we don't stop!	1	5.56%
It's true, but any effect is negligble in the scheme of things, indeed it might be beneficial!	3	16.67%
Don't know, but I think we should cut CO2, just in case.	6	33.33%
I don't really know, but I think we should concentrate on other more proven issues.	7	38.89%
I think it is probably just politicians making the best of the current trends to gain more power.	8	44.44%
I think it is a total scam, planned in detail to help implement a bigger agenda.	3	16.67%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll

12-11-2007, 08:41 PM	#1 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	What do you think of MMGW? Where do you stand? Multiple choices are allowed. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems Last edited by mkpdavies; 12-11-2007 at 08:48 PM.

12-11-2007, 09:25 PM	#2 (permalink)
Smidgey Uber Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 2,169 Party: Libertarian Party	I voted the second and third options, but to qualify, by 'cut' and 'we', I mean the free market - not the government. __________________ How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might! -Georg Friedrich Händel

13-11-2007, 12:15 AM	#4 (permalink)
Anthony Butcher Administrator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Long Ashton, Bristol Posts: 9,823 Party: None	I voted 'Don't know, but I think we should cut CO2, just in case'. I haven't read a vast amount on it, but I have read sufficient amounts to put me in the position of not accepting either side as providing a sufficiently robust argument. However, since I don't think that anyone knows for sure, I think that we should err on the side of caution and take reasonable steps. The downside of doing nothing and being proven wrong is potentially too high to risk, IMHO. This is slightly off topic, but related; I don't think that it will do us any harm to cut pollution generally either. When I used to come home after work in London, I would often have black snot (sorry for being vulgar) just from the pollution in the air; that can't be healthy. I certainly wouldn't bring up my children in a city if I could help it. __________________ If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled! Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

13-11-2007, 08:29 AM	#5 (permalink)
rjt Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Aldershot Posts: 5,292	I feel we should concentrate on other more proven issues, far more discussion needs to be had on this issue, from what I have read on this forum though people who do beleive in it have no time for any contary opinons arrogantely proclaiming there views under a banner of so called established science. MMGW will not feature as a prominant issue at the next election. __________________ Mr Delors said that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the community, The Commission to be The Executive and The Council Of Ministers The Senate. NO! NO! NO! (Margaret Thatcher 30 Oct 1990) Ignore List: The Prophets of ST Al the Unelectable.

12-11-2007, 09:43 PM	#3 (permalink)
Anthony Smithee Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Portsmouth, Hampshire Posts: 73	Just to clarify, I don't believe it will be beneficial. I think we're having an effect, but I don't believe that CO2 is the primary cause. I do think we should try to cut down on emissions, but we should give priority to other issues first.

13-11-2007, 09:23 AM	#6 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	I'm for finding more ways of creating energy and being more efficient with the resources we have. That CO2 would fall because of that is just a side issue for me. I certainly won't ever back any taxation or removals of freedoms off the back of it. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

13-11-2007, 10:00 AM	#7 (permalink)
Smidgey Uber Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 2,169 Party: Libertarian Party	Yes, CO2 will fall to market pressures. Oil will eventually run out, same with gas - a replacement is needed and by the looks of things, hydrogen cars and nuclear power plants (maybe eventually fusion) are the way to go. People who don't believe in MMGW and those who do will also buy more efficient energy consuming items for their homes (such as long life lightbulbs) because they save money by doing so. The same is true of insulating ones home and so forth. The benefits of doing these things in a free market are much better than having the government do them and whether you believe in MMGW or not is not important, technology has always improved our environment. Could you imagine the London congestion if we all still rode horses? The streets would be full of **. __________________ How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!** -Georg Friedrich Händel

14-11-2007, 02:20 AM	#8 (permalink)
NoMoreEUSSR Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: ANZAC-Land Posts: 479	I plump for (4) and (5), what with being an honest in-duh-vidual and all.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode