warming, petroleum dependence,
human causation, or natural flux?
We do not argue that the planet is warming.
The question is the extent of the variation.
We know from science, that carbon gas in the atmosphere,
traps the suns rays, and warms the entire planet.
The argument is one of urgency.
The debate is a question of prescription of apathy.
No one is advocating the collapse of modern society,
but irresponsible apathy destroys the planet, going the other way.
It seems the issue is obvious, when you drop the politics,
one view says do what you want, another is do what you should.
Even if you do not agree that mankind is causing the warming,
support the phenomenon simply in promoting nature, and the Earth.
If you are the one who tries to undermine environmental efforts,
you are contributing directly to species suicide.
If we can deal with the issue now, why should we wait?
Why should we argue against what will be better for us?
The meekest default
Assume the worst, as a conservative,
global warming is nothing but political propaganda.
What do the people have to lose, or to gain?
They have nothing to lose, but maybe they will be able to breath.
Who needs to breath, as long as we have jobs…….