On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:11:11 -0600, "Ryan P."
wrote:

dgk wrote:



Before we get into a big debate (which has been done many times by
folks far more knowledgeable on these issues than us) I need to know
where we are starting from.
.
.
Debates are fun, as long as we keep them civil. Unfortunately,
many people result to name-calling and slander rather than attempting to
actually debate!
.
.


Do you believe in evolution? Lots of folks don't, so global warming
can't be a problem because the world is just the way God wanted it and
isn't old enough to have climate shifts. I see a leading Republican
contender doesn't believe in evolution. That should scare the shit out
of you. "If you want to believe that you and your family came from
apes, that's fine. I'll accept that," he said Friday. "I just don't
happen to think that I did."
.
.
I am a Christian, so I do believe that God creates everything...
However, I am more in the camp of "guided evolution." Who are we to say
that God snapped his fingers and POOF here we were? I have read many
Christian and Jewish leaders who believe in evolution. Why couldn't
God's plan be for species to adapt to the environment so they can
thrive? And since, as a Christian, I believe in Free Will, if we choose
to screw things up, that's our own problem.

The evidence is far too plentiful. Of course evolution happens. To
flatly deny it is silly. The mechanics are a matter of faith though...
If one truely believes God is all-powerful, then there's no reason to
use science to understand the process.

But plenty of folks (apparently including Huckabee) think otherwise.
I'm agnostic. We're here and something created the universe, but it's
something so far beyond my understanding that it is, for all practical
purposes, God. I've long thought of the earth as some grade school
God's science project. I think he/she/it is going to get a poor grade.

....


If we agree that the earth is getting warmer, is man at least partly
responsible? Some scientists seem to thing that humanity is too
inconsequential to be causing climate shifts. I look at all the stuff
we're dumping into the air, sea, and ground, and think that not only
are we altering the weather, we're causing lots of other damage -
species extinction, new types of organisms, and such.

Many scientists who disagree that man is responsible for all of global
warming agree that we're having some impact.
.
.
Of course man is partially responsible. To think otherwise is stupid.
On the other hand, the Sahara desert has been expanding for
thousands of years. You can't tell me the ancient Egyptians were
pumping more pollutants into the air than natural forest fires around
the globe.

..1% or 40% or 70%?
.
Do you believe that the global warming debate is a conspiracy to
funnel research funds into the pockets of evil scientists? If so, you
might also consider that well funded corporate interests might be
paying the bill for some of the scientists that oppose the global
warming idea.
.
.
A conspiracy? No. A histerical reaction? Yes. Some corporate
greed? Yes. How much money that goes towards "carbon credits" is going
to line Al Gore's investment portfolio? If human-generated carbon is so
horrible, shouldn't the spokesperson for global warming be reducing his
consumption at the same time as investing in "green" technology?

So you think Gore is doing his thing for profit? I don't. Perhaps he's
wrong (I think not obviously) , but he is sincere. I think the profits
that are being made polluting the world fund campaigns that might
limit those profits.

....
Actually, there are climatologists that say humans as a whole would
benefit from warmer climates because more people die of cold-related
problems than heat-related problems!

Unfortunately, the last two years, the global temperature has been a
bit cooler. In fact, the Antarctic ice caps have been steadily
expanding for MANY years in most areas, and polar bear populations have
exploded.

Do you have a cite for that? I see this:
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/

And this seems to suggest the opposite on Antarctic Ice caps:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4228411.stm