Is Global Warming a Crisis?

Gosh.

Your rhetoric is not your own. It comes straight from the opposition sites that skew data. Yours, however, is not an accurate recreation of that information. It's not the 80s. It's the 70s. And there really WAS a global cooling during that period. A brief decline in a long climb of global temperatures. And it wasn't a big alarm at all. It was brought up, however.

In addition to your regurgitation of flimsy opposition, your personal belief doesn't hold in a scientific debate. Your comments about Mt. St. Helens, carbon, and gaping holes in the ozone indicates your gross misunderstanding of the impacts of CO2 in the atmosphere. Neither would you necessarily feel the effects in your home state, nor would you feel them right away. As for your comment on weather patterns, those are directly impacted by global warming (regardless if you believe it's man-made or not). We're talking about climate, not weather.

Your implication that global warming is a money -making venture is highly dubious, and you've provided no supporting evidence of this. Furthermore, suggesting that if one cares about the potential for an increase in global temperatures that could greatly alter weather, sea life, CO2-absorbing plant life, and consequently all life on Earth are supporting a single political party in a single country on this planet is absurd without concrete evidence.

Here's my contribution to the environment in order of least to greatest efficacy:
1) I conserve energy in my home (lights, gas, water, etc)
2) I drive an economy car
3) I use alternative and mass transportation
4) I do not support animal agribusiness

I do not throw money at organizations, nor do I recommend this behavior to others. Also, if I intend to support a political party, I will do so by helping promote the ideals of their to which I align.

I strongly suggest you ignore your country's party lines (the absurdity of a dual-party system is topic enough for another debate) and start considering facts, then consider motives. If you're really going to press the "ulterior motives of political parties" argument, shouldn't you take a closer look at what former Bush administration "experts" stood to gain by fighting to notion of man-made global warming?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml

Or it could just be the stupid liberal media always attacking a conservative government. Or maybe James Hansen and his esteemed colleagues are lying about not being able to speak to the public about their research, their findings, and their conclusions.

Please do a little more research, come back with some concrete arguments, and see if you can present them in a way that doesn't sound like Rush Limbaugh diatribe.