Quote from: Kadri on May 19, 2014, 03:21:41 PM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on May 19, 2014, 02:04:21 PM
There is no problem with food, water and so on.
...
but keeping parts of the world poor and hungry allows for cheap labor, cheap production and high profits for multinationals.
4% of the water is fresh and suitable for drinking...but it's key to divide those carefully to keep the global financial system going.
...
So there is still a problem Martin. Yes you are right of course.
I just don't wanted to go to that route you mentioned.
Everybody does have his own views and no one changes his view reading some posts easily.
Mostly it ends with mutual blaming etc.
It was about if climate change is real or not.
etc.
I think you're absolutely right Kadri by saying that we we should try to stick to the original question.
The reason I'm saying this is because I think you can't answer this question without knowing what the driving force is behind the global warming question.
To me(!) it is without question that the information on this question is very, very...very(!) coloured.
There's big money involved with the global warming issue. Either industries who see opportunities to make money and industries who may loose money.
We need to put faith in scientists, but because of money they are more restricted than ever to publish their objective findings.
Research is either funded by the industry which is pro- or anti-global warming or by a government which is also under the influence of those same industries because of lobbies. Even then, although some here try to look away from it, there's definitely politics involved as well.
There are clearly political parties pro- or anti-global warming.
Long story short; it's very hard to be completely objective as a scientist as they are being paid to deliver an already chosen conclusion.
The volume of this kind is much larger than the volume of true objective scientific research.
We will never know the truth and another simlpe reason for that is that we don't have a second or even more earths to really scientifically compare how the climate would evolve without our interference.
I believe the climate is changing, to some extent, but even that conclusion is already pretty subjective. How long is the human race profound with science? On a geological time-scale we're just studying this for a mere second or minute at most.
To then even say that there's climate change AND that it is induced by humans is quite bold.
Of course there are correlations, but these definitely do not mean a causal relation between the two.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/kjh2110/the-10-most-bizarre-correlationsWe know very very little and we extrapolate all of that to a conclusion which serves our needs or the needs of the paying party.