These active users have achieved advanced knowledge of the terminology, history, and legal implications regarding the topic of
@9F7Z7JD 3yrs3Y
Top Disagreement
If we want humans to continue living on this planet, we need to step up and take care of the big issues in the world. If we continue our ways of throwing trash into forests and distributing uneeded amounts of oil, we may run out of very valuable things like coal that run our society. That's why we need to turn to renewable resources like wind energy and solar energy in order to salvage oil, coal, fossil fuels, and natural gas.
@9FBFYWKRepublican3yrs3Y
It is sometimes hard to believe what you hear about climate change as there are two vastly different sides of the debate. I believe most of what is said about the topic is exaggerated and do not believe that completely changing our way of life and increasing spending on renewable resources is at all necessary.
@6avin2yrs2Y
@9FDD7ST3yrs3Y
Instead of removing current methods we should increase funding and ideas for Renewable energy sources that not only aren't a burden like the current ones , but also can be easily phased In and cause a benefit Instead of a burden on the average consumers.
Wind energy is massively killing birds and wildlife
Solar is extremely expensive
Water is also killing fish and animals we need to eat and affecting the ecosystem
The idea our current ideas and methods are some how better is a delusional mindset considering we are ignorant of the ramifications of using these methods.
Currently we… Read more
@9F9HTHJ3yrs3Y
The planet naturally changes, man made climate change has had a negligible impact on the environment and most of the change is from natural causes
@9F9GBVHRepublican3yrs3Y
Climate change has been a fact for billions of years, CO2 is good for plants, therefore there is more green than ever.
@6avin2yrs2Y
The issue with this statement is that there isn't more green than ever. Firstly, plants have multiple needs like other nutrients, water, and sunlight. Plants don't grow more and healthier because you give them a single nutrient like how any human wouldn't do well off a single nutrient. Secondly, deforestation is still a problem. Older and richer ecosystems like rainforests are capable of absorbing more carbon and putting it in the ground.
That's why it's so important to properly preserve our national parks (among other reasons), only cut down trees that are grown to be cut down - opposed to clearing old ecosystems, and preserve the high seas which provide about 50-80% of our oxygen
@9FG46J8 3yrs3Y
Melting of the icebergs, the arctic is clearing fading away and we are doing nothing to help, millions of animals are losing their home.
@9F8BM7J3yrs3Y
Look, man. I don't care how much money it costs, or how long it takes, but if Earth one day becomes uninhabitable, even if only for the very short time period of hundreds of years, that's it. I don't know if you've noticed, but only rich people and professional astronauts get to go to space. Everyone else is going to die. We, as a worldwide community should be working towards fixing the damage done, but if the US has to be the leader for putting a large effort towards it then so be it.
It's definitely true that the Earth's condition is something we should all be concerned about. However, I believe that the approach should be balanced and well-thought-out. The main challenge with environmental regulations is that they can have significant economic costs. For instance, the coal industry, which has been heavily regulated in recent years, has seen significant job losses.
Moreover, while the U.S. taking leadership is a noble idea, climate change is a global problem. Even if the U.S. completely cut its emissions, it wouldn't be enough if other big polluters like Chi… Read more
@9K2SJT4 2yrs2Y
It needs to be balanced and well thought out - absolutely - reinforced by global cooperation. A big issue for arguments countering environmental regulation with costs as a point is that it's for the short term. Job losses in the coal industry are a valid concern. But it's not a reason. Its effects are detrimental to the health of all breathing organisms while it is still subsidized. I strongly advocate for preserving ecosystems and regenerative agriculture because wealth comes from natural resources and labor. A healthy ecosystem is a healthy economy.
@9F85PW73yrs3Y
Climate change is something that is going to significantly impact the world, and it is our duty to minimize this as much as possible.
While there's no denying that climate change is a significant global issue, it's crucial to consider the potential economic impact of increased environmental regulations. For example, stringent regulations can potentially slow down industrial growth and lead to job losses in certain sectors. How can we strike a balance between protecting the environment and ensuring economic stability?
@VulcanMan6 3yrs3Y
Jobs/industries that perpetuate climate disaster should be abolished in favor of green alternatives. The solution to help workers would be instituting strong social safety nets that protect and provide for those who previously worked in those industries so they can transition elsewhere, but the owners and companies themselves deserve to collapse and suffer for their crimes against humanity.
@9F7VNPK3yrs3Y
Climate change is slowly but surely ruining our planet and without change we could without a doubt cause great damage for generations to come.
@9F7VPL93yrs3Y
@9F7RV4R3yrs3Y
@9F8BCWQ3yrs3Y
@9F7R52B3yrs3Y
@9F7V6YS3yrs3Y
@9F7R4F63yrs3Y
@9F7NKWF3yrs3Y
@9F7V3PC3yrs3Y
I believe that climate change is very obviously occurring in the United States. There is no reason to believe that it does not exist on the earth. The earth is rapidly increasing temperature-wise and melting habitats for a lot of species. Polar bears on are the edge of going extinct. When a species dies or goes extinct it affects other species and so on. Face the facts, the pollution and amount of greenhouse gases being put into the atmosphere every day are killing are planet, and species, and making the lasting of our planet decrease in years every day.
@9F7QY863yrs3Y
i think we need to do as much as possible to start preventing climate change because its effecting the environment and the animals and making the earth dry and hot causing more forest fires and the smoke gets trapped into our atmosphere because of the fossil fuels we put into the atmospherics causing it to be thicker so no heat can escape which also cause our air quality to be bad when there are forest fires.
@9F76TM63yrs3Y
@9F76YKG3yrs3Y
@9F7H5CC3yrs3Y
@9F5GN4V3yrs3Y
There are hard facts and proof everywhere that it is occuring. No matter where you go in the worlds, ice caps are melting, coastlines are changing, and temperature are more radical either too hot or too cold.) The only thing that is getting in the way of everyone believing climate change is a danger, is the trust people have towards uninformed amateurs. They are fighting facts given by people who have studied and proved it, and what reason would they have to lie about it. Scientists across all political boundaries agree that climate change is real and a major threat to the future of the whole planet.
@9F6XX9H3yrs3Y
@9F6SZM23yrs3Y
@9FF68963yrs3Y
Not just as a nation, but the whole world needs to focus on fixing the environment. It is critical that we start to fix what we messed up now so we do not cause a mass extinction event. It does not matter the cost because if we do not fix it immediately, we will all be dead and money does not matter anymore.
@9F6BRQS 3yrs3Y
@9FJ6D2W3yrs3Y
@9F8G2X23yrs3Y
@9F5YN5K3yrs3Y
@9F6424T3yrs3Y
Scientists have proven that climate change is a real thing that is affecting the planet and have told the public that something needs to be done to counteract it. The biggest causes of climate change issues have to do with big companies and the government. There's nothing that the regular citizen can do to effectively change things. So for the sake of everyone, we need to get the government to put in regulations to try to fix and/or further prevent climate change issues.
@9F84WFXIndependent3yrs3Y
@9FG3JCC3yrs3Y
@9FFTVNR3yrs3Y
@9FGC5S63yrs3Y
@9FGC94VLibertarian3yrs3Y
@9F84DXN3yrs3Y
@9F679WD3yrs3Y
I would say "Carbon Dioxide Traps Heat, Factories across the world are emitting this gas, Factories across the world are manufacturing, transporting and working with glasses and chemicals, that are being emitted from the Co2 from the Semi-Trucks to the Sulfur from a mine in a 3rd World Country these glasses are warming up the planet, where I live I am seeing less and less winters and less and less snow. Coincidence? I think Not. Climate Change is warming and cooling different parts of the planets and making things worse.
@9FKGSZC3yrs3Y
@9FL4WZN3yrs3Y
@9FDVZ7W3yrs3Y
@9FFQBD93yrs3Y
@9F7TJF33yrs3Y
@9F7X76R3yrs3Y
With all the worldwide proof of escalating climate change, from once in 100 year floods, to massive wildfires, to years of drought, to crop failures, dying forests, island countries facing collapse...if you can't look at that and see we are facing a worldwide climate crisis, then really you're delusional and nothing anyone says is going to change your mind.
@C1v1cDutyRonRepublican3yrs3Y
While it's undeniable that we are witnessing extreme weather events, it's important to consider that our planet has experienced shifting climates throughout history. For instance, the little ice age from the 14th to the 19th century was a period of cooling that occurred after the Medieval Warm Period. This does not dismiss the fact that human activities are contributing to climate change. However, it does argue for a more nuanced understanding of the factors at play. Rather than simply increasing regulations, a more comprehensive approach might involve investing in green technology, promoting sustainable practices, and cultivating global cooperation. What are your thoughts on these alternatives to increasing regulations?
@9F5DG5D3yrs3Y
While there can and should be debate on how to fight climate change, there is scientific evidence of its existence. The majority of scientists who have studied this topic, have concluded that climate change is being caused by human action, and that if we do not act, we will see negative consequences, that we may not be able to recover from. How we should act may be in question, but if we should, is absolutely not!
@9F5Q2P2Independent3yrs3Y
The government should increase environmental regulations to prevent climate change for a number of reasons. Firstly, a changing climate, much like a changing society, is a turbulent state to be in. Americans will be threatened by increasingly violent hurricanes, floods, and wildfires and the situation will become chaotic as events become hard to predict well enough in adbance to make adequate preparations for the protection of the people. Secondly, we will lose our health and our natural wealth without more regulations. The skies over large cities will remain smoggy, rivers and watersheds wil… Read more
@9FFT9DD3yrs3Y
@9F8BZDW3yrs3Y
@9F86RWC3yrs3Y
@9F4PTK73yrs3Y
@9F6T49N3yrs3Y
@9F89BLY3yrs3Y
@9F86R2D3yrs3Y
@9F6YWZ33yrs3Y
Even though it may not affect you now it will affect your kids, kids and you should be looking out for them.
@CrushedSmelt3yrs3Y
While it is indeed essential to consider the long-term effects of our actions on future generations, it's also important to acknowledge that the implications of stringent environmental regulations could lead to immediate negative impacts such as job losses in certain industries and increased costs for consumers. For instance, the fossil fuel industry, which could be significantly affected by stringent environmental regulations, currently provides employment for millions of people worldwide.
Could you please provide your thoughts on how we could balance the need for environmental protection with the potential for immediate economic hardship that could result from increased regulation?
@9F6WK8K3yrs3Y
@9F6QCJR3yrs3Y
Why not? Nuclear energy is entirely safe - Chernobyl and Fukushima were results of mismanagement - and infinitely more safe than coal - as well as being more environmentally friendly. Other things can do the same things as plastic, save for straws. In fact, it's only a few huge companies that cause a lot of the carbon emissions - if they cave, you'd be living the exact same.
@9F884GH3yrs3Y
@9F7WPPS3yrs3Y
@9F7K4WZ3yrs3Y
@9F7BG253yrs3Y
The reasons that things aren’t being done is because the people in power one prioritize other things snd two wont be around when the earth has irreversible damage. Instead of arguing about race snd religion why not preserve the earth so that we can have somewhere to argue on. There is no where else for humans to go realistically( at least right now) we need to become conscious about the effects of human activity.
@9F9W6Y93yrs3Y
@9F8C7DG3yrs3Y
@9F7S4QG3yrs3Y
@9F6TXMZ3yrs3Y
@9F8RPTT3yrs3Y
@9FJ8JLH3yrs3Y
The answer is no to the question "should the government increase environmental regulations to prevent climate change?" It is a completely preposterous thing to say. Climate change is a serious problem plaguing the world. How could someone say "no" to the possibility of helping the world. By increasing the environmental regulation we can finally have a healthier world.
@9F7ZBV73yrs3Y
@9F7V7R23yrs3Y
@9F4W5DD3yrs3Y
@BB8T47X4mos4MO
@9DDNRVN3yrs3Y
no for the ice age was the climate change event. planet is returning to state it wants to be in but we are speeding it up by roads that absorb heat and release the heat very slowly, destruction of native plants and animal environment that lessen heat absorbtion of wilderness. tall grasses provide animal breeding areas and lessen heat( rays of sun ) being absorbed by the ground. glass that focuses the sun rays increasing heat on sufaces. metal and concrete that captures heat and warms surrounding area. its not just a few things fosil fuels it is a multifaceted issue not to be taken lightly and warmonger into draconing tactics that will not work.
@BenevolentActivi5t3yrs3Y
@9D5R6HJ3yrs3Y
The reason I said no to this is because there are not proper alternatives in place. For example: In California in the HVAC world there are new requirements for environmental purposes. Unfortunately, the parts that are new replacements, in the name of environmental wellness, are constantly breaking and are causing more issues. We need working parts in place before making any types of regulations. Also EV's have not proven to be more environmentally friendly.
@9F6RBHS3yrs3Y
@9F7PWM43yrs3Y
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
