Home > Politics, News & Issues > Environmental Issues > Environment (Other)
Results so far:
| Yes | 41% | 116 votes | Total: 281 votes | |
| No | 59% | 165 votes |
Yes
Created on: September 08, 2010 Last Updated: September 09, 2010
If the idea that human-caused global warming were somehow proven to be false, it would most definitely affect the green movement. In fact, for anyone who has been paying close attention to the topic of global warming and climate change, it is abundantly clear that even the idea that it may not be human-caused, without proof of it being wrong, is affecting the green movement. There is much more to the green movement than just recycling or eating organic food, which in all honesty, likely would not be affected by the opinions of global warming one way or another.
One major factor in the green movement, however, is incredibly affected by whether or not people believe humans are enhancing global warming and that is the new economy, clean energy. Clean energy technologies are an enormous piece to the green movement worldwide. Clean energy is spurring rapidly as the leading economic stimulus across the globe, but human enhanced global warming is the primary reason for most of the industries exponential growth.
As the planet continues to mount up piles of evidence of the warming world, scientists predictions are coming true, and in some cases are even worse than originally imagined. The debate over whether or not the current warming is due to human activity is really an argument of fact versus opinion. Facts show that humans are changing the Earth’s climate. However, at this point in time, opinion is somehow winning over fact, and it is having a negative effect on the green movement.
In the United States specifically, the leadership within the U.S. senate has shown that because of the smallest amount of doubt about the impact of humans on global warming, they are unwilling to pursue legislation that could have created millions of jobs, made our nation energy independent and pushed us forward as the leaders in the 21st century economy. Even if you don’t believe in human-caused global warming, these benefits were good for America’s future. Now, without the passage of comprehensive legislation, it is likely that other countries, in particular, China, will be the next global leader in the future global economy, instead of the United States.
Regardless, if human-caused global warming were proven without a doubt to be real, the industries would more than likely spur much faster than they already are and our governments, both here in the U.S. and globally would rapidly create policies to address the problem, boosting the green movement and the industries that are linked to it. As it stands now, with even a small percentage of people who doubt the effects of humans on the planet’s climate, there is enough room to negatively affect the movement. The proof, as it is sometimes said, is in the pudding.
Learn more about this author, Kevin Numerick.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Created on: October 22, 2009 Last Updated: October 24, 2009
The "green movement" refers to the human tendency to want to reduce, reuse, and recycle. Yet, with a dawning consensus that global warming is not controlled by man's carbon-dioxide footprint, the idea that the desire to conserve is something new or can go out of style is what will suffer.
The name "green movement" may fall out of use, but appreciating our resources by using them sparingly and with care is not a result of the relatively recent hypothesis that the planet earth is going to overheat because of man-made pursuits and activities.
Our ancestors used their resources with an ultra conservatism that would put us all to shame. The leftovers of their work and leisure had to be used sparingly and re-utilized in order to survive.
The most successful enterprises have only endured in the world because of a severe appreciation for the resources which maintain life.
The green movement is only a new name for an old idea that will never die out. The recent and unprecedented widespread material plenitude and resulting available disposability has allowed for a false sense to prevail that we need not concern ourselves with finding ways to utilize resources with stringency, discipline, and with the future in mind. Renaming the conservation instinct inside humanity as a "green" movement is a natural response and an appropriate attempt to market an old-fashioned mode of living.
It is perhaps because of the lack of scarcity of food, fuel, and indoor climate control and even health care and people to which we have never before become so accustomed, that we have had some of our most respected scientists worry up the idea that this plenitude will result in a global warming disaster if we do not learn to attempt to conserve even if it appears it is unnecessary.
And yet the only real challenge left for us from such affluence is not to recognize that conservation is the best measure because without it we will not survive, but it is to learn to treasure and conserve these things nevertheless.
The green movement is a reaction to this new spreading affluence, serving only as newly packaged reminder that just because things and even people are so readily available, it is only in holding dear even that which is easily replaced where lies the true joy and meaning in life. For without it life is not worth living.
The movement to conserve and to cherish will never suffer, only the vanity in thinking this is something revolutionary will.
.
Learn more about this author, Elly Mcgleim.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.