Does the Global Warming battle distract us from other Environmental problems?

I am a supporter of the legitimacy of the Global Warming problem, and a long time environmentalist, but I see climate change itself (since the change doesn't seem especially significant) as minor compared to other things plaguing our planet.





Does Global Warming make the public as a whole more aware of environmental issues, since it's really a pollution issue (not a climate issue), or is all the hype just making it hard to concentrate on core environmental issues like biodiversity loss, habitat destruction, air and water pollution, overpopulation and resource preservation?|||it was intentionally designed and promoted by madison avenue through captive media outlets to distract attention from functional conservation programs and concentrate the attention on oil company profits and political power. All the functional programs are now either dead or almost dead and we are still dependent on fossil fuels and will be far into the future because of the AGW program.|||Global warming is false. The world is not overpopulated, it's just the people are concentrated in areas (deserts and scrub) unable to sustain higher life forms like people and animals.





Global warming is based on knee-jerk reactions to a minor spike in temperatures several years ago. Right now we are going through the coldest, snowiest winter in about 12 years. But this winter is no different than in the 1970's with lots of cold and snow. So I'm willing to accept that weather and climate goes in cycles. The climate is *always changing* and will continue to do so.





The bigger problem is land and water pollution. Al Gore's carbon credits do nothing to clean up the trash left over in city parks, or that there is so much plastic waste in the oceans that it's being ingested by fish. The plastic has been broken down into pellets and is threatening to replace sand.|||An actual intelligent question about global warming. I'm not used to seeing those in the religion section of Y/A, I mean global warming section of Y/A.





I would say yes. I am of the mind that global warming is a hijacking of the environmental movement. Resources and time are being siphoned away that could be used to deal with problems that are more pressing, solvable, and real. Soil degradation, fresh water supplies, and air pollution are far bigger threats.





When the apocalypse fails to materialize people will consider all future warnings of problems to be just more scaremongering. The AGW crowd is doing harm to the environmental movement.





By conflating science with the dogmatic support of axiomatic ideas, the AGW crowd discredits science and all enlightened thinking.





AGW is a false doom. CO2 is a trace gas, and it is vital to life. A minor rise is not a bad thing. We're a tropical animal, our food supplies rely on warmth and moisture. What they predict would be more benefit than harm.|||While we may be going through one of the coldest winters ever, other places are going through the warmest summer ever. Big misconception, the earth doesn't get warmer with global warming, the oceans do which causes the weather to change in turn effecting the environment.





I think global warming does get in the way of the actual environmental concern. People get too fixated on disproving it to see the real point. We are messing up the planet and need to get it under control. Yes, all the people in the world could fit on Rhode Island but imagine all the by products of those people, all the cars each one owns, all the trash they produce and the fact that everybody wants some land to live on. Now take away all the uninhabitable land, you're not left with much.|||I see the battle as one that brings to light the environment as a whole. And that is good for everyone.|||yes, trying to prevent global warming is just a waste of time and resources that can go to real environmental issues|||polar bears are drowning in their natural habitat. thats a biodiversity loss.