|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{wikipedia}}
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Contrarian views==
| | * [[Measures to stop global warming]] |
| Global warming is accepted as the scientific consensus and {{WP|climate change skeptics}} are a very small minority of scientists. This does not require proving it beyond doubt: consider the practice of the insurance industry to plan for outcomes of varying degrees of likelihood. As the scientific consensus is that there is a very strong probability (the IPCC says 90%{{fact}}) that humans are causing significant climate change, it is vital to prepare for it.
| |
|
| |
|
| There is less agreement over the best solutions. For example, the role of [[nuclear energy]] and the relative importance of climate change as opposed to directly addressing poverty are open to debate.<ref>{{WP|Bjorn Lomborg}}</ref>
| |
|
| |
|
| Critical analysis of technologies and strategies are important, though of course each side of an argument can have its own bias.
| | [[Category:Global warming]] |
| | |
| Such contrarian viewpoints and critical analysis can be found at:
| |
| *[http://www.reason.org/airquality/index.shtml The Reason Foundation]
| |
| | |
| ''Note: this is not an endorsement of arguments found at these websites. However, if a site is assessed in depth and found to be seriously inaccurate and misleading, it should be removed from this page, and the reasons given on the [[Category talk:{{PAGENAME}}|talk page]] (where the decision can be noted and reviewed by the Appropedia community).''
| |
| | |
| ==See also==
| |
| *[[Renewable energy]]
| |
| *[[Incentives for sustainability]]
| |
| | |
| ==Notes==
| |
| <small><references/></small>
| |
| | |
| {{stub}}
| |
| | |
| | |
| [[Category:Pollution]]
| |
| [[Category:Sustainability]] | |
