Means of the introduction is of course take into account human factors and fairness, the possibilit

Three general fallacy. One fact of life. The time to act. I got the ideas of history, evolution and ethics, and I noticed that they all have to be properly understood, so that we can actually work to curb climate change. At the same time we need to understand human nature.
There have been important fly lady in the history of civilizations that have lasted a lot longer than our current civilization, and they were lost (the modern age began about the Renaissance). There have been natural fly lady disasters, wars and disease epidemics. For example, the Assyrian civilization in 600 BC, it took 5-6 times longer than ours. Indian edustalta the seabed is again found an ancient civilization that destroyed most likely fly lady mega-tsunami. Therefore, fly lady we can not assume that our own civilization would remain forever, or that our actions could have an impact on its survival. (Sources / around among Dan Carling, Hardcore history: Judgement at Nineveh http://cdn4.libsyn.com/dancarlinh/dchha17_Judgment_at_Nineveh.mp3?nvb=20090828115645&nva=20090829120645&t=0b7f52b084f32418d90fd Risto Isokallio: Saraswati sand)
Man is the course of evolution, all the time just automatically be wise. Darwin showed that evolution runs guided by chance. The Value naturalist, paleontologist Björn Kurtén image of the chains of natural tinkering.
Man is an animal progress if we do not actively doing work in front of it. By this I mean the cultural progress of useful and good information is transferred from one generation to another (lamarkismi). Thus, it is clear that a person does not develop automatically smarter, so that today's fly lady problems would be solved in the future on their own. (Source / source of inspiration: Bjorn Kurten: The Innocent Killers, January 1987.) fly lady
The values must be separated from the facts, called for the last century, the great philosopher Bertrand Russell. We can not attack the facts of the arvoväittämillä. We can not, for example, fly lady to say that climate change is one drug Haataja, because of the raving so much that it threatens to narrow the privileges.
Science investigates the facts. If the screen on an issue is sufficiently convincing, and it can not be scientifically to destroy, it is a fact. One thing is how each faktaan wants to take. Already Plato summed up by this: "The truth is well justified true belief." Thus, at this point is a waste of time to argue about whether, for example, climate fly lady change fact or not. On the other hand, we can argue about this intricate phenomenon in different areas, means to mitigate process risks, the benefits already achieved, etc. This is also related to another well-known philosophical thought: GE Moore's naturalistic fallacy: the moral good can not be restored in the world empirically measurable property. Of what is, we can not say that as should be.
(Source eg: The MIT Integrated Global Systems Model, fly lady a detailed computer simulation of global economic activity fly lady and climate processes: "The most comprehensive modeling yet carried out on the likelihood of how much hotter the Earth's climate will get in this century shows That without rapid and massive action, the problem will be about twice as severe as previously Estimated six years ago. "http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/roulette-0519.html)" In Fact, That the AR4 estimates 20-30 % of species assessed would be at risk of extinction if climate change leads to global average temperature rises Greater That 1.5-2.5oC5., "The fourth assessment report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). www.cbd.int/climate/ fly lady
Means of the introduction is of course take into account human factors and fairness, the possibilities to maintain the conditions of well-being, etc. Unfortunately, all the species living conditions of our partners is impossible to maintain. (This does not exclude the importance of animal protection.)
We already have the problem-solving necessary to the mouth of the technology, know-how and the will of principle. It is also not about money but about the allocation. fly lady It is said that during Reagan's Star Wars budget would have already solved this problem. World Bank economist Sir Nicholas Stern talked about the 2006 that mitigation efforts would - then initiated for - pay only 1.5% of world GDP. What's wrong with procrastination? Certainly mm. poor-rich countries of system use, market mechanisms, the problem in the distance, etc., but also somehow human nature.
A large proportion of the people are indifferent to the front. They focus on everyday life, are not they on the other hand do not even think of influence. Some deny the whole problem, fearing that it would reduce the response somehow their ability to act in certain ways. On the other hand a more reasonable to some extent, which may not be enough. This I believe is one root of the problem.
It is also rational to reduce their own carbon footprint, so that trying to optimize it so that the resources for the welfare and happiness of the material fly lady conditions for a reduction by more than unnecessary