CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Neil

Reward Points:1
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:1
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
1 point

Should We be Considered an Endangered Species?

If catastrophic climate change is for real and is as devastating as most of the world’s scientists say it could be, most of us would be killed prematurely by its effects.

The naysayers tell us it’s a big hoax; it’s just big corporations finding a new way to make money, and more government taking over our lives.

And anyway, for us to build an entirely new alternative Energy System would create more enormous debt that our children and grandchildren would have to pay back.

And With our present economy the last thing we need is more debt!

But let’s stop and think. What if it is a real and present danger? Can we afford to do nothing or very little? Is our national debt a bigger threat then the possible extinction of most life on earth? These are really tough questions and nobody has complete and perfect answers.

And by the way, the gathering body of evidence from the applicable scientists, is that the really bad part is coming a lot sooner than originally thought. This means that most of humanity will be extinct within 40 to 50 years.

It’s sort of like this is one big scientific experiment: let’s see how much carbon dioxide we can pump into the air before the climate is radically changed and the kind of life that is now on earth will no longer be able to survive. This is basically like we’re living in a test tube, and nobody really knows how the experiment is going to work out.

Let’s look at some possibilities:

1. We do nothing to solve the problem and there never was a problem. O.K., we win.

2. We spend a huge amount of money and we replace the oil and coal Energy System with an alternative nonpolluting Energy System. We may end up ducking the bullet and saving humanity. Maybe there never was a problem and we will never know. We would then have a whole new Energy System that’s no longer dependent on foreign oil and we’ve ended that kind of pollution in the world, not an entirely bad way to go.

3. We spend a lot of money to build a completely new alternative Energy System that is nonpolluting even though it’s too late or beyond the tipping point. We’re all dead and it doesn’t matter if we run up the debt.

4. We do nothing, because we don’t believe there’s a problem, most of life on earth is gone, our young children today and our grandkids of tomorrow, all die.

Neil has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here