Why is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?

for things like global warming, when the risk of it could have terrible and deadly consequences for us. It seems to me to be like buying car insurance...we could at least begin to protect ourselves...it would be cheaper to start sooner and might not even affect our economy to the negative...so why don't we do something. Why are some people so unwilling to see scientific data or work so hard to find alternative and obscure data denying problemsWhy is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?It's ironic that those who think that God left us the earth are also the ones with such a hard on to spoil it.Why is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?
I read an artical in "The Mother Earth News" several months ago about how congress voted on environmetal issues. They voted along party lines. Democrats voted for environmental issues while Republicans voted against them. Check out what they tried in the Alaskan preserves.Why is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?No the problem is these sheep back views they dont fully understand. The only thing they know is their leaders tell them it is not a valid fear so they are like rabid dogs, mocking and just ignoring facts.

It would cost more for the companies who pollute to not pollute so it will never happen since the US is in run by corporationsWhy is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?
Many liberal "environmentalist" can't tell the difference between a marsh hen and a pigeon.



All pollution is bad, but there are those that use environmentalism as a political tool.Why is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?The unfortunate reality of the global warming debate is that it is not about saving the planet. Global Warming is about government funding for research. This is why the rhetoric changes every few years. Or has everyone forgotten Global warming's predecessor, Global Cooling? There is no real consensus on Global Warming cause and effect even among believers. Global warming may be real, or may not. Global warming may be man-made or it may be natural. The worst cause of Global warming may be pollutants from man, but then one volcano eruption might do more damage than all the pollutants combined. A new theory put forth by a Nobel scientist states our best bet for fighting Global Warming is put more pollution in the air to block out the sun's rays. Every year we hear numerous tirades and predictions about how bad things are going to be because of Global Warming, but when it doesn't happen do they say we were wrong? No! They just pretend like they never said it in the first place. The simple facts are that we should all strive not to pollute the planet. We should car pool, dispose of our trash properly and recycle. These are commonsense solutions. The rhetoric is about money and if you want to know the truth about any situation in life, just follow the money.
Sorry, the mass of data being ignored by government paid "scientist" prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that natural solar cycles are causing "Global Warming". The main problem with greenhouse gas is NOT carbon dioxide, but with methane, as the natural warming of the oceans decompose more and more merthane hydrate, a factor which is completely out of human hands...



As for other environmental issues, ask yourself this: Am I living in a wood house and driving a car?



Bottom line? Human life on planet earth is doomed, no matter what. Dig a hole, jump in... Ever hear THIS on the evening news?Why is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?
Because many of the proposed environmental laws carry with them a huge burden and unanswered questions. It's a wonderful idea to clean-up the air, water, and land . But if you knew, if you were experienced in environmental law and clean-up, your opinion would be different . I worked in that field . It's a cluster-fu__. BTW I worked in that field under Clinton/Gore, and the problem is that the American Public is just not aware of what consequences come from enacting unsound environmental laws and guidelines. Some people talk out their as_. They make false claims of job losses whenever anything 'new' is enacted . However, if we really did enact many of the proposed environmental regulations, businesses and factories would close within a year . Many, many of them . The result would be the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs . That's the ugly truth . Why would they close ?? Because the proposed regulations don't include solutions . There are many CURRENT environmental regulations that are widely ignored and not enforced , for the very same reason . NO SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS . I must add, that there are some solutions and many of them are being implemented, but most of the solutions are astronomical in cost . Beyond your imagination . Both privately and Federally.
Nature is a pretty sight only to those who are sitting pretty. Your scare stories about Doomsday are as dishonest as Bush's about terrorism by Saddam. Under your feel-good delusion, it's not just the corporations who lose by enviros hoarding the land, it's the workers and the consumers. Your movement is a fraud controlled by the right wing. For example, the US would be self-sufficient in cheap oil if we could develop all our land. Because of artificial shortages, the oil companies are allowed to charge us OPEC prices and gouge us mercilessly. Economic elitists always come up with moralistic pretexts in order to cover up their greed for domination. And you fall for this trick. The Kennedys and other spoiled trash aren't going to lose anything if the economy is stifled by your restrictions; all they care about is their relative power over others, which will remain overwhelming as the common people are deprived of opportunities they had under open development.Why is there so much reluctance to support environmental protection?
I think it is easier for them to pretend to believe those who tell them there is not really a problem - that way they can say, not my problem, they said it would be okay, and leave the mess for the next generation. They are totally irresponsible.



Whether or not we cause global warming, which should really be called global climate change as some areas will cool and others will warm, we should try to prevent it as much as possible. Doing nothing is like saying that we won't build levees to protect from floods because, hey, they are cyclical and natural and might never happen anyway. In other words, irresponsible.
Because it destroys the economy.