Political Correctness

is rubbish

George Carlin on the evoution of language: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h67k9eEw9AY

Is funny.

Ex: Polar Bear

White Fish Eating Mammal of the arctic

Ex 2: Global Warming

Naturally trackable slight temperature fluctuation which may or may not be caused in part due to gaseous emissions from vehicular type machines.

See, funny. LOL

Global warming is happening, however there is ambiguity regarding the cause, its a known fact that the earth has climate cycles, with ice-ages occuring once every ten thousand years or so(we're due another right about now), the reasons for these climate cycles are as yet unknown, but possibily shifts in the gulf-streams are a likely culprit.

 Massive shifts in weather patterns are historically linked to volcanic emissions, ie Krakatoa late 19th Century spewed out so much material into the atmostphere that the resulting layer of dust in the skies had global consequences.

If you consider the amount of crap that industrial activity has put into the atmostphere over the last 3 centuries, then it is very feasible that emissions are causing global warming, however this industrial activity maybe postponing the next ice age, so its all good??

but on the brightside, greenland will be habitable again, we'll have some proper winters again.  The whole de-salination issue is overblown anyhow, the fresh water held in situ on greenland and the poles is but a fraction of the entire water on the earth, and change in sea water salt-levels will be minimal, or even if it does reduce salt-levels, then sea-water will be more drinkable, thus providing more consumable water for the poor and needy

"that humans are involved in enhancing it significantly has not yet been scientifically proven"

Oh really?Who told you that? The american government scientists? It is pretty clear SCIENTIFICALLY that humans are the principal cause of global warming, as natural global warming is nowhere as close as what it is now (right now it is several times faster than what any warming or cooling has been in the last 100 000 years), and that incidentally this very accelerated global warming  (if the global warming was slow and more progressive, it wouldn't be a problem) happens exactly at the time of the industrial revolutions were lots of greenhouse gas started being emmited, and we know for a fact that greenhouse gas cause global warming.

Now, where can even a reasonable doubt stay?

Hehe this happening in a topic ridiculing political correctness makes quite stupid, even if the poster was quite serious in fact...

We're actually talking about GLOBAL WARMING! Unreal. I like fantasy as much as the next guy, but come on. A few decades ago the media was all worried about the world going into a deep freeze. Similar opinions were given during the "dust bowl" years about the heat. These two options ping pong back and forth to give people something to get involved in to make themselves feel better that they're "doing something."

Let's all go live in tents and eat spinach and try to not pass gas, because passing gas hurts the ozone. We'll all ride bikes and throw away all our spray deodorants. And don't even get me started about how much electricity this forum is WASTING from our natural resources. That's why my computer is powered by tiny mice that run and run and run and run and run. I feed them organically grown rat food. It's very expensive, but I'm single-handedly saving the world from exploding. And I break even from the money I'm saving by having a battery-powered car.

Me and my tent: salvation.

I couldn't expect less from an american worship leader. Facts are not your domain, I know. Oh and the ozone layer has barely anything to do with global warming. Is evolution another thing you are challenged with?

 "I like fantasy as much as the next guy, but come on."

Of course, being a worship leader of whatever you are worshipping is much more factual. 

"to give people something to get involved in to make themselves feel better that they're "doing something."

Oh! The irony! 

Me and my prayers: salvation.

Of course, I'm not really being serious and only humoring the topic, which is: political correcteness is rubbish I also do think that religion is much more credible than global warming.

I'm glad you're being humorous.

By the way: philosophy student? 

"By the way: philosophy student?"

Exactly, and I even do study some theology as part of my medieval philosophy course. Your point is? 

I'm loving this debate, not worrying about political correctness facilitates a more open discussion. 

 From a balanced perspective (rather than the devil's advocate's), there is a gathering mountain of evidence to support the man-made paradigm, but like with most contempory issues, commerical information media tend to over-hype, simplify, and also present one-sided arguments.  This is of course, intended to maximise advertising revenues.

 The scientific community is, and has always been overly concerned with maintaining hard-earn reputuations.  Any break with the accepted concensus is therefore inevitably met with derision. 

Scientific arguments are validitated by a process of being unable to disprove the presented theory.  This is why it took so long for people to recognise the signifigance of polluting the atmostsphere, and subsequently why they refuse to even consider the argument relating to natural climate cycles.

 As for religion......

 Power corrupts!

Most organised religions were formed within a political context, and adapted ( or intrepreted ;-) ) to the various political climates of countries.

Organised religion is a tool of social control.

 I think you're wrong.  The water contained in the ice on Greenland may be only a fraction of the water in the ocean, but if someone released a toxic chemical into the air, it would only be a small fraction of the air, but it would affect (kill) a lot of people.
I'm not saying that the excess freshwater would kill all the sea creatures; I'm just saying that a small percentage can make a huge difference.  

I get the point you are making, ie like a pesticide increasing in concentration as its works its way up the food chain.

But salt isn't really a toxic chemical and quite unlikely to be released into the air on masse????

 I agree with you on the politicians, but I have to disagree about the global warming facts.  Over the past 600,000 years, the global temperature and CO2 levels have never been as high as they have been in the past few decades.  Also, if you think about it, how many cars were there in the past 600,000 years?  None.  How many are there now?  I think there's probably close to half a billion worldwide.  What is a car's main form of exhaust?  Carbon Dioxide.  Is CO2 a greenhouse gas?  Yes.  What do greenhouse gases do?  Trap the Sun's heat within our atmosphere.  Therefore, humans are significantly contributing to the Earth's warming, and we are pushing the regular cycle into an erratic slope that goes up and up and up, and may never come down, unless the politicians decide to lay off the gas.  :D

 That's not quite the point I wanted to make.  I didn't mean that salt was toxic, because if it was, I'd be dead by now, with my high-sodium American diet.  :D lol.  I was just trying to show that something that seems small can make a huge difference.  Here's an example that probably shows it a little more definitively:  Congress (or Parliament) have a major decision to make, and it will affect the entire world (say it's a new policy on cleaning up the world's trash).  48% are for it, 47% are against it, and 5% are undecided.  That 5% will make all the difference.  If they decide to go one way, the world will adhere to the new law, and if they go the other way, we will keep landfills (or something like that).  That explains it much better than my first example, because there will be major changes caused by a small percentage of people.

Anything in excess is toxic, salt is a prime example of this, so take it easy on the burgers my friend! :)

Small changes do make a difference, but most decisions by politicans are invariably a false economy.  Carbon off-setting for example !!  Chinese factories are being paid to be more environmentally friendly, they can sell carbon credits to western corporations, who then use them as propaganda, "hey look everyone, we're being really green, aren't we great!!"

But the fact is that these corporations are still responsible for epic amounts of pollution. Rather than invent a greener solution, its cheaper for them to pay someone else to be greener.  Its a joke, but people fall for it. How can this be tackling the issue, its just passing the buck.

Being green just simply isn't profitable!