The problem has always been that there isn’t enough proof to counter the Global Warming crowd. I don’t think the question has ever been asked about why? The answer should be obvious, if people are researching it, then they would have found evidence that Global Warming is not caused by humans.
Common sense dictates that carbon dioxide can’t be the sole cause of Global Warming. Common sense would also dictate that since CO2 is used by plants that it can’t be a pollutant. Common sense would also give that the Earth has proven that it has went through periods of cooling and warming on its own far before humans entered the picture.
Alas, if you give politicians any leverage to gain power, they are going to take hold of it by any means. Such inconveniences like facts, evidence, and proof be damned when power and money can be had. People can see that the Earth is warming, they just aren’t educated enough to doubt the reasons why. How many people know about the dynamics of El Nino and La Nina? How many people understand that computer simulations are about as credible as weather predictions made for a year out.
I think most people would laugh at the person’s face who states that they can predict the weather accurately up to a year. How is it then that people are supposed to accept similar computer simulations for 50 year to 100 years out? Common sense should dictate that if you can’t predict further than a week with any accuracy, that trying to predict the weather far beyond that is quite frankly impossible.
It has always been my problem with it. It just doesn’t make sense. Why then should my life be so affected by people preaching that CO2 is harmful? Are you so certain that it is the lone factor? No, well actually it isn’t, but it is easier to talk about it than the 10 or so actual competing factors that make up what people consider green-house gases. Also, CO2 and the other gases make up a small percentage of the actual green-house gases in the atmosphere (source: Wikipedia).
People tend to use the environment as a Straw Man, “Well, you love the environment don’t you?” Of course I do, I just don’t think government would do all that great of a job correcting the problem. We haven’t even confirmed that it is even a problem worth solving or if we can even solve it. Are people ready to live like the Amish in order to “save the world” because I’m not. Not unless it is proven without any evidence to the contrary.
It hasn’t yet been proven what effect the Sun has on our weather and warming trends. Are people researching that? People have been researching the affects of CO2 for over two decades, where are the people looking over the effects of the Sun? Where are the people looking at other factors that could be the true cause to our past and current warming trend? Do they not exist or are all of the people missing the elephant in the room?
Looking over the Watts up with that? site, the evidence points to certain evidence being flawed as to whether we are actually warming as much as people are saying and the kicker is that there is undeniable proof. You can see for yourself the evidence people are using to say that if we don’t do something, we are going to melt the polar icecaps and flood out people around the world.
Al Gore’s movie “The Inconvenient Truth” is a great movie (barring the parts where it talks about Al Gore) and very entertaining, but that is all is should be considered. Statistics can deceive as well as unexplained graphs without proper context. The graphs of the IPCC are very convincing up to the point where you realize that they are talking about changes in the hundredths of degrees of of micro portions.
Sure the dark reds are scary, but you have to realize that it just means that the Earth could be maybe a degree or two warming in the future than it is now. Well, if the computer models are accurate that is.
Possibly Related Posts:
- Bullet: E-Book Library Management and Content Server
- Using ZendFramework 2 beta1 For Directory Project
- The Way of Kings and Cosmere Theory
- “In Time” Movie Premise Flawed
- Completing HTTP Library For PHP
Well I’m no scientist but I think the CO2 pollution in large cities and industries can’t be any good for the environment, so for now I tend to agree and believe the human factor adds to the global warming problem…
You wouldn’t have to live like an Amish if there was a real industrial and therefore government interest for making environmentally friendlier vehicles at reasonable prices.
What I’m trying to say is that if you want to lower the amount of CO2 in the air, you can either plant more trees (which is difficult, because it would take a lot of them) or you curb industrial, which costs them money that they’ll have to pass on their consumers.
The problem with CO2 being a pollutant is that plant life requires it to live. Therefore, we have to say how much is too much for human life and but not too little to where plant life suffers. How can you say something is pollution of bad for the environment when the environment requires it.
Also, if you really want to curb global warming, you’ll attack the factor that contributes the majority to the warming and not something that has a tiny percentage. Do some research, you’ll be surprised at what it is.
Am… The gigantic livestock industry?
LOL. Now that is funny.