The trendy climate crisis of the 60's and 70's was global cooling. I'm sorry, but the only thing hippies proved is that acid is stupid.

You think Pharmacutical Companies and big Corporations that give us our food, care about our health?

If so, do you think they would continue to put MSG (Monosodiumglutamate) in our food?
Do you think they would continue to give us Pharmacy drugs that have side effects that are even more deadlier than the symptom the individual has?

You need to quit being so nieve.

It tastes good.Because it's the best thing we have. Besides, side effects vary in degree. What may be awful or deadly for one person is minor or nonexistant for another. Also, cite an example of a drug that is more deadly than it's disease it treats.

You need to stop being so distrusting. People aren't inherently evil. And I noticed how you sidestepped the hole I punched in your arguement by simply ignoring it. Explain to me where in the drug making process drug companies inject poison into their drugs. I've shown it isn't in R&D. And the industry is huge. Why has no one written a tell-all book about how he screwed over everyone with the flu?

What hole did you 'punch' in my argument except for you claiming your father works for these companies and 'doesn't put these poisons in the pills"

Does your father know the long term effects in humans of some of the chemicals that are used in Pharmacy Drugs? Until you can prove to me that he does, you haven't 'punched' a hole in my argument you've just claimed things that you are trying to use in defence of your point that has no solid proof except what you believe.

I don't write down every pharmacy drug I see advertised on the T.V. because I honestly don't care. But every single commercial that advertises pharmacy drugs has a list of side effects... And I've heard on a few different ocassions "and possibly death" as one of the side effects.

And there are numerous commercials that have popped up: "If you or a relative has taken *insert pharmacy drug name here* and has developed cancer, disease or death from it, you may be entitled to funds" and one of the commercials even named off a pill made by Bayer.

Sooooooo why are you telling me to 'quit being so untrustworthy' when there ARE harmful side effects in Pharmacy Drugs?? That creates MUCH distrust to me, especially when I see advertisements broadcasting that if certain drugs have created problems you're entitled to money. How can I trust these pills if people are dying and becomming sick on them?

Its called having a mind of my own and not being brainwashed to believe what I'm told.

So where's this hole in my argument? I've simply stated that Pharmacy companies KNOW they're slowly killing us with the chemicals they'are using in their drugs and given you reasons why I believe so and you've simply stated your 'dad doesn't put poison in the pills'......

Again I ask you: Does your father know the long-term effects of the chemicals in humans that he is working with???

It has been suggested that the global warming scare main objective was to put through the kyoto protocol. The KP calls all countries to cut down on co2 input by 20% or something like that. Meaning that mostly china and other countries would stop industrializing so quickly. Secondarily thought to keep poorer nations from expanding technologically. If you look at the effects of cutting down on co2 to actually make the smallest slightest difference then the economy would suffer greatly. So basically if global warming is man made we are screwed (because people are so selfish they will not sacrifice) second, if it isn't real then there is another reason other than trying to cut down on co2 (because the government knows cutting down on co2 will bring harsh times.) And what could that be?

I don't know, but all I really know is that cows belching contributes greatly in the process of CO2. (Not to mention hundreds of gallons of water an average cow drinks per day and acres of grass it needs is really stunning) So theoreticly thinking, more people equals more cows to farm to supply or needs. Which there are happen to be a lot of people already driving cars which happen to get in crashes making ambulances, firetrucks, etc. to race to the scene which occurs every minute, which is going to cause a very huge chain reaction. Factories are a major concern, producing weapons needed for wars republicans started.

In this case, humans have created a double edged sword. It backfires one way or the other. If the world decides to massively endorse environmental issues and take it up the national level- it will turn us back to stoneage, and in the process billions of people will die of starvation, and poverty. And massive disorders that puts the world in chaos. If we decide to keep prosper, someday- we will trigger a catastrophic environmental problem. To a point- in the worst case: Earth becoming uninhabitable to lifeforms.

Nuclear power is really the best solution to global warming and the energy crisis (which is on temporary holiday). Though nuclear power produces waste which is incredibly hard to dispose of, I'm sure there is a way to extract more from the waste, and whatever's left over can always be launched into space at great expense.

The best solution at this point is to wait several billions of years and hope for the best.

In response to Dazed:

If we endorse environmental protection, we would restore the Earth's general biosphere, and kill of others through poverty and starvation. This is true, mainly to the mainstream developing countries. Stage 1 and Stage 2 countries (those of which that can provide for themselves without aid) will survive, and developing/resource depleted countries will suffer.

If we decided against environmental protection, we would continue our normal ways of life, and eventually artifically turn Earth into Venus.

In the end, you must decide which is more important: Letting people die for the greater good of humanity, or save them, and doom the rest of their generations.


You'd need to mix a little bit of both. Environmental protection to keep the earth alive, but continuing with SOME of the market things to stimulate the Economy, and bring in Cash.

This graph is constructed from this data:
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat