Donald asks…
Do you wonder why Gore and the IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize?
I think this article explains why they won a peace prize for their work on this environmental issue.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/nov/04/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
“A total of 46 nations and 2.7 billion people are now at high risk of being overwhelmed by armed conflict and war because of climate change. A further 56 countries face political destabilisation, affecting another 1.2 billion individuals.
This stark warning will be outlined by the peace group International Alert in a report, A Climate of Conflict, this week. Much of Africa, Asia and South America will suffer outbreaks of war and social disruption as climate change erodes land, raises seas, melts glaciers and increases storms, it concludes. Even Europe is at risk.
‘Climate change will compound the propensity for violent conflict, which in turn will leave communities poorer and less able to cope with the consequences of climate change'”
Any thoughts?
punker – maybe try reading the whole question (and links therein) next time. Forgive me for not checking on your Glenn Beck reference, but he makes me want to hurl.
The Expert answers:
For all the people who claim that global warming will not cause political instability and war. The following people disagree with you.
– Gen. Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (ret), Military Advisory Board Chairman, former Army chief of staff and current president of the Association of the United States Army
– Adm. Frank “Skip” Bowman, USN (ret), former director of naval nuclear propulsion at the Naval Sea Systems Command
– Lt. Gen. Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (ret), former deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force
– Vice Adm. Paul G. Gaffney II, USN (ret), former chief of naval research and head of the Navy Meteorology and Oceanography Command
– Gen. Paul J. Kern, USA (ret), former commanding general, U.S. Army Materiel Command
– Adm. T. Joseph Lopez, USN (ret), former commander-in-chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces, Southern Europe
– Adm. Donald L. Pilling, USN (ret), former vice chief of naval operations and Navy chief financial officer
– Adm. Joseph W. Prueher, USN (ret), former commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Command and former U.S. Ambassador to China
– Vice Adm. Richard H. Truly, USN (ret), former NASA administrator, shuttle astronaut and the first commander of the Naval Space Command
– Gen. Charles F. “Chuck” Wald, USAF (ret), former deputy commander, USEUCOM and director of Strategic Planning and Policy at Headquarters U.S. Air Force
– Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, USMC (ret), former commander, CENTCOM
“Climate Change Poses Serious Threat to U.S. National Security”
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-16-2007/0004565995&EDATE=
Donna asks…
What is your opinion about the idea of converting coal to oil?
I read an article in the WSJ last week about South Africa converting coal into a liquid form that can be refined into gasoline and diesel fuel. Although it obviously will not meet the world’s demand for oil, it is a substitute that is being considered in other places like China and even the United States. On the downside, it is an expensive process, and there are also some environmental concerns. What is your opinion on this issue? Informed opinions only, please.
Here is a recent article on this matter: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/articleArchive/aug2006/oilfromcoal.php
The Expert answers:
Its expensive now, but I like it, as it will drop in price when more and more is done with it to make a better and more cost effective process.
Laura asks…
Interesting Environmental issue?
I have a class presentation and report on environmental issues and I am having trouble finding an interesting topic. Does anybody have any interesting ideas that will keep a class intrigued? I was thinking about increasing natural disasters or something along those lines but any suggestions will be helpful.
These are topics I want to avoid. (they are already taken and not very interesting):
Global Warming – Fact
Global Warming – Fiction
Peak Oil Theory/Hubbert’s Peak
The Cost of Oil
OPEC
Oil in Africa
Ethanol
Electric Cars
EcoTerrorism
Urban Planning
The Global Commons
The Role of Governments
Automotive Industry
Social Norms
Provincial Government Policy
Federal Government Policy
UNFCC
Urban Sprawl
Endangered Species
The Green Revolution
Genetically Modified Foods
Water Scarcity
The Role of Non Governmental Organizations
Invasive Species
The Expert answers:
How about consumerism and how globalization is destroying the rain forest, shifting developing populations to slave labor from subsistence living. Globalization puts a larger carbon footprint on almost everything we buy,use, consume and often dispose of. You can also talk about the processed foods 50 year campaign against the kitchen which has dramatically increased the amount of garbage we create per person, lowered the nutrition we get from food and has created a health crisis in the US. We are no longer in touch with our food system and massive polluting factories are raising much of our food and making us sicker in the process. Just take a look at all the food wasted with all the recalls in the past few years. Over 25% of the food produced in the US goes to a landfill.
Betty asks…
Children in third world countries?
I know this may sound inhumane and cruel, but I must admit…?
I have to admit that I have been harboring this private opinion for quite some time and have not shared with people that I interact with personally on a day to day basis, for fear of judgment. It’s not extremely pressing, however I felt like sharing so here it is.
I don’t believe we should be spending funds on saving the ‘starving children in Africa‘ etc. Of course I don’t believe that anybody deserves to be living in those desolate conditions and of course I empathize with them; I am no psychopath.
However, I do think we should be spending money on issues like global warming and other environmental issues.
If all those people in third world countries lived like we did, with electricity in their homes and access to computers, and use of all the kind of technology we have the privilege of, imagine how much more destruction we would be causing to the earth!
We’re not really saving the earth by helping third world countries evolve.
What are your thoughts?
(Btw, I know this doesn’t really fit into the psychology category, however I find that when I place questions in the psychology category answers tend to be longer, more detailed and from a psychological perspective, which is exactly what I am seeking.)
OH bloody fucking hell thank you first answerer with the blonde hair for understanding my point, even if you are opposing my arguement. I asked this in a different category and people are MISSING MY POINT. Thank you for understanding.
The Expert answers:
Why are Children in the Third World still starving?Britain has sent Billions in Aid to these Coutries, but they still live day to day. Why haven’t the Governments of these countries used the money for Irrigation, Sunk wells for water, and so on.Why do children in these countries have no Education?
This happens year after year, despite all the aid given by UNICEF and other countries. Why are we always having to send money to Charities to keep these Children Alive??
Sandy asks…
I know this may sound inhumane and cruel, but I must admit…?
I have to admit that I have been harboring this private opinion for quite some time and have not shared with people that I interact with personally on a day to day basis, for fear of judgment. It’s not extremely pressing, however I felt like sharing so here it is.
I don’t believe we should be spending funds on saving the ‘starving children in Africa‘ etc. Of course I don’t believe that anybody deserves to be living in those desolate conditions and of course I empathize with them; I am no psychopath.
However, I do think we should be spending money on issues like global warming and other environmental issues.
If all those people in third world countries lived like we did, with electricity in their homes and access to computers, and use of all the kind of technology we have the privilege of, imagine how much more destruction we would be causing to the earth!
We’re not really saving the earth by helping third world countries evolve.
What are your thoughts?
Solo: How degrading to me, for you to insult my intelligence and level of informity. Do you think I am going to listen to you after you use such a condescending tone with me? I am well informed on third world countries, thank you very much. Basically what I am saying is, that although it may make me sound inhumane and cruel, I think we should leave those countries be. Let them fall behind, whatever. We should be focusing on saving the earth we have now. If there is no earth, there will be no people to save anyway!
Also, if these people do die, they will be using up less resources. Let’s say EVERY single place on Earth was industrialised and modernised, imagine how much more quickly we would be destroying our Earth and speeding up global warming. Is that what you want solo?
To keep them just alive, hanging on by a string, always suffering? Why not put them out of their misery? I don’t want to see anybody dying.
Now, I put this more euphamistically in my question text. But there you g
I’m sorry but everybody who answered besides solo has terrible spelling and grammar skills; which leads me to therefore conclude that they also lack the appropriate education and knowledge required to answer my question. Some people are clearly misinformed. Before you state your opinion, please go educate yourself. Yes, solo questioned my level of intelligence and my ability to comprehend complex issues, however it is not a lack of education that is evident here it is the fact that I value having an Earth to actually live on and continue, and if this means taking away funds from helping third world countries stay afloat, so be it. I don’t think that Africa is a continent of starving children. FFS.
Let third world countries fend for themselves, if they end up in ruin so be it. How do they contribute to our world anyway? Oh, that’s right, by ripping away millions of dollars so that they can be kept alive in horrible conditions that nobody would want to live in anyway.
I want for there
The Expert answers:
I totally agree.
I too, struggle to have conversations with this subject to many people I interact with. I mean, to think & to express an opinion as such on this subject is definately deemed “racist” & “inhumane” but I believe it is a matter that needs to be arised & delt with correctly.
My issue is, say you’re an African, struggling day to day with hunger, dehydration, safety & dieseases. Who in their right mind would want to raise a child in those conditions?! It’s cruel & inhumane, how dare peopke judge us on our opinions when these so seems “selfish” & “inconsiderate” people are doing this?
Insted of sending money & food, how about contreception & education?
Please do not get me wrong, everyone deserves to have children, create a family & so on. But seriously? In those living conditions. You must be stupid.
You never see the adds on tv showing the mid aged people, just the old sick ones & the young starving ones. I think it’s their way of getting clean water & good food for them to better their life, they’re using the young & old as a prop to get us to donate.
I’m not racist, I just have strong feelings against this & how people are allowing it to happen. In the end, it’s their choice, so why are we wasting our time on a lost cause when there are way more important things to worry about, such as animal cruelty, child abuse, global warming, natural disasters that have devistated populations?!
Answer that!
I hope you get the answer you’re searching for xo
Powered by Yahoo! Answers