First, I don't care about future generations after I'm dead.
Well, in that case [you] don't need to be anti-science. If you don't care about your, or other people's children that's the end of it. It probably makes you an unusual person that I wouldn't want to befriend, but that's irrelevant.
Second, I don't deny climate change occurring because it's part of the natural cycle of the earth. They have found periods where the climate may have actually warmed even faster than it is now and it was warmer when the dinosaurs roamed the earth.
Just because climate has and can change naturally, it does not mean that humans cannot change it as well. Civilization was not present during those past states and changes, and switching rapidly to another climatic state now is going to screw us over. Perhaps you should check your own arrogance and trust the scientists who have built careers knowing far far more about this than you, or actually do a little research to debunk your own misconceptions. I like this site as a user-friendly introduction.
You can pay one-or-two "scientists" with lose morals to say whatever you like. I don't think you can pay an entire scientific profession to say what you want. If we're talking about those who can pay for lies, nothing beats the combined might of the fossil-fuel and agriculture industries.
I'm not antiscience, I'm against using science to create sensationalism which is what is happening currently. The same people who scream loudest about climate change seem to also be anti-GMO. I'm not saying the climate science is completely bunk, I'm saying it's overblown. Some of the solutions are things I already practice and teach my kids like treating nature with respect and responsible use of synthetic chemicals (I've seen weeds that have become resistant to glyphosate).
Honestly I think GMOs developed for things like better yield and disease resistance should be embraced but that heirloom varieties should also be preserved in order to preserve their genetic material. GMOs that are created to be pesticide resistant are reckless and will come back to bite chemical companies that pushed them. Currently the time it takes to research and produce a new pesticide is 8-10 years (after discovery) because of the necessary trials and such. If farmers all switch to 2,4-D resistant crops then by the time an effective alternative to 2,4-D is released farmers could be battling weeds that have 2,4-D resistance and are losing entire fields to those weeds. And that's not counting any human toll from an increase in 2,4-D exposure.
Finally the paying scientists to further an agenda is common and occurs on both sides of arguments. If their experiments can't be replicated then they should be exposed and their findings erased. I have also maintained that I do not deny climate change, I deny that it is going to "end the world" as fast as they claim because I think it is being politicised.
Oh and my views towards future human existence are because we have screwed up almost everything we have touched, I'd rather humans be removed and the animals have a world without us.
I'm not antiscience, I'm against using science to create sensationalism which is what is happening currently.
From what I can see, those most worried about global warming are the climate scientists themselves. GMO is irrelevant.
Oh and my views towards future human existence are because we have screwed up almost everything we have touched, I'd rather humans be removed and the animals have a world without us.
You better hurry up then, we're killing the animals off pretty quickly with or without global warming. I care about preserving other species for future generations of humans... it's disgusting to be given this paradise and just shit all over it to deprive future generations. I'm sure there are many alien worlds with thriving ecosystems and no humans out there.. I don't really care about them (or earth) without us.
First, I don't care about future generations after I'm dead. Hell, I don't even care about most humans currently alive. Second, I don't deny climate change occurring because it's part of the natural cycle of the earth. They have found periods where the climate may have actually warmed even faster than it is now and it was warmer when the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Third, I think both sides are trying to gain a quick profit and are drowning out the honest scientists. Lastly, the fact that we can't predict weather with high accuracy past 5 days out is reason enough to say that there's no way they can definitely say the world as we know it will end in less than 50 years. I've seen various scientists say that global cooling is actually coming once the warming period ends (which is possible, England was once known for its wines). We aren't going to screw the planet up.