Is The World Getting Better Or Worse?

On this forum we end up having to repeat things many times because others missed them. Sorry but that's the reality. It drives me crazy too. If your posts aren't on the subject I'm pursuing at the moment while I have a dozien others to deal with, sorry but I may miss them. So if you want me to see something you've already posted, post it again.No we can't control other nations but if our input into the problem is just a tiny fraction of theirs and the overall effect is just about nil, stop bugging the US about it, you are only asking us to commit suicide.

I'm only sixteen minutes into it and so far I don't have a problem with most of what he's said. I don't doubt the warming trend, I doubt its causes and whether there is really anything we can do to affect it. So his documenting the wwrming trend is not a problem.But now at 16.33 on the counter he's got this chart up showing the warming trend over the last thousand years and I'm having a horrible time figuring it out.Overall it looks like a general trend over that thousand years, but more noticeably since about 1350, all of it before human industrialization. The most recent rise probably includes the Asian increases but so far he hasn't differentiated any of it. There's a lot of bouncing around in the recent era. Well maybe he'll get around to breaking it down.I can't post it because it's a film on Amazon but maybe I'll be able to find the chart somewhere.

Stop with the empty assertions.

You added the quote after I'd responded.All you do is assert blindly that our input is "major" and the quote you post about how it's human activities that are responsible for the increase over the last 150 years is also a bare assertion.Gore's chart in his film that shows the warming trend over the last thousand years shows that it's been pretty general over that time. There's an increase in most recent times but I'm still trying to figure out what it means.And there is nothing in the EPA quote that connects our emissions to the warming trend, and it says nothing comparing us to other nations.

What I believe probably isn't relevant because you're all going to cram your interpretation down our throats no matter what the truth is.

Thank you for posting that. It does leave me in the position of having to figure out percentages of percentages of percentages, wondering which percentage of which gas contributes what percentage of the problem, wondering what a "sink" is and why it doesn't work to remove the extra amounts of gasses and so on. Unless you want to address these questions I do plan to keep looking into all this so maybe they will get answered anyway.And, again, I know you think all this science is really very solid, and perhaps it is while I'm just not able to follow it well enough to recognize it, but I still have the impression that there are so many variables there is no way anyone could be sure about what it's all doing or is going to do.And again, the way this all gets discussed continues to be disturbing. Trump is an evil person for wanting to improve our economy, make us independent of Saudi oil (which will go on polluting the atmosphere in any case). Exact HONESTLY CALCULATED percentages of the contribution to the problem from any of the changes he's made, in comparison with HONEST CALCULATIONS of the input from other nations, would help.And the idea that all this gets legislated no matter what the public thinks is very worrying. China treats its people that way, but we shouldn't. Take away jobs and production by legislation on the basis of SOMEBODY's calculations that we can't share in and treat us like idiots for wanting our nation to continue to function independently of enemy nations?. This is so political rather than scientific why can't you all appreciate the position we're in?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You seem to be saying I'm doing the wrong thing and will have to pay for it? Of course I disagree, I think I'm on the right side of this. based on my understanding of the moment. If I change my mind then I will also change my attitude toward these problems.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I hate to have to say so but I can't see your chart well enough to make sense of it. I can't see anything green on it either. And I don't trust such charts anyway. But I would like to see some trustworthy information about those particular relationships somehow.

So much for empathy. I appreciate the science. I do not appreciate the Leftie accusation.

Thank you very much for the science, and for the explanation of "sink."I think we should plant ten billion trees, and we can include fast-growing ones. And there's nothing wrong with planting other kinds of greenery while we're at it, that would put out oxygen a lot sooner than the growing forest would. But I know I'm nave. The accusation of "ulterior motives" is offensive. Throughout this post you refer to "we" which implies the US, especially since you make so much of Trump's actions. But this keeps hitting me as political mystification. I'm aware that the US has made big changes for the pollution problem over the years, it's not as if we've ignored it. I remember when my relatives in LA could no longer use their incinerators. After that the trash was hauled to the landfills, which you say is also contributing to the problem. And we've had smog reducing devices on our cars for forever. Meanwhile China is a gigantic polluter and does absolutely zero to fix the problem. And not just China but all of Asia and India and Pakistan etc etc etc. The whole western "First World" meaning the US, the UK, Australia, Europe, Canada etc. add up to about a billion and a half people, as comparied with the remaining six billion who are the big polluters, but somehow WE are always being targeted. If it weren't all Leftists demanding that WE change it might have a little more credibility.Since all this is guestimation, I'd guestimate, even wiith Trump's restoration of oil and coal, that our share of the overall problem is probably about 5%, maybe 10%. Even if we brought all our industry and other sources of pollution to a screeching halt it would have just about no effect on the global warming problem but WE are the ones getting called names and accused and accused and accused. Which proves this is primarily a political manipulation. Primarily.NOT THAT I'M SAYING I REJECT THE SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTS OR THE NEED FOR INTERVENTION. I'M STILL WORKING ON IT. Between bouts of depression about it all anyway. Here's that "we" again. I posted the statistic above somewhere of 80% plastic pollution coming from Asia and 20% from the west. It's hard to lose the impression that for some reason this whole thing is about killing the west.But I'll try not to get too paranoid and come back to the science as I can. Maybe more on this post later.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

And *I* don't appreciate THIS utterly false unfair accusation, when it's the LEFT's politics that allow the real polluters to do their worst with impunity and, whether you know it or not and I really don't know how deep you are into the Marxist underpinnings of all this, are out to destroy the GOOD GUYS of the planet. Us.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes we do need a more educated population. And what I'd like to see us educated about isn't only science but the history of the Marxist/Communist attempt to destroy America, which has succeeded to such a degree it may be impossible to undo it. In other words this IS about an ideological conflict and NOT about different segments of the population voting for different needs the other side doesn't take into account. Lately I've become more aware through discussions with a liberal and a conservative just how impossible it is to bridge the ideological gap. It's scary. I'm grateful to God that it isn't worse than half and half, but it could get worse fast.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Why? You don't keep yours out of it. Whenever you accuse the "alt-reich" of causing the problem, or Trump, you are not keeping YOUR politics out of it. When you accuse my side of only being concerned about "the bottom line" or having ulterior motives you are not keeping YOUR politics out of it. When you accuse my side of not caring about the future generations or the future of the planet you are not keeping YOUR politics out of it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

NO. There are legitimate concerns about the SCIENCE according to many on my side although I don't feel able to judge any of that yet. Since you are clearly devoted to science you arfe going to object to this, but accusing us of other motives is unfair.And as I keep noticing, legitimate concerns about the politics on the Left too. Really really evil.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Please note that I'm talking about an ideology, not about people. Nothing to do with individual sin, all about ideas that can destroy a nation. Marxism contradicts the very essence of what America was founded to be.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.