Not Evil Just Wrong
Global Warming…
I’ve been doing mountains of research lately on the issue of global warming due to the upcoming Copenhagen treaty that we as a country are being asked to participate in. I was wondering what all the hoopla was about. People seemed to be really upset about this treaty. I mean, we all know that we’ve got to stop polluting our atmosphere to stop global warming and this treaty is the answer. Or is it?
We’ve all seen An Inconvenient Truth. It is an unbelievable example in the power of filmmaking and has reshaped the debate over our environment, of which I believe needs to be protected. I was impressed and thought, something needs to be done about this impending environmental catastrophe. Or does it?
I decided to dig a bit, and the more research I did on my own regarding our influence on the environment due to emissions of C02, CH4 and H20, the more unconvinced I became. I was nervous. Is the science behind the current hypothesis of climate change based on insufficient and unsound science? The multitude of research, mathematics, computer modeling and facts were dizzying and confusing. Facts seem to contradict each other often. There are scientists who disagree. Additionally, the scientific method appears lost when it comes to this growing “science.”
There has been some public debate over whether or not another theory might better explain why our earth is undergoing a warming trend. Is it us who is changing the terribly complex atmospheric systems, or could it be something else? Perhaps the sun? Is consensus science, or perhaps simply consensus? When does science become so complicated that we must accept it on the basis of faith?
Is the warming trend actually a bad thing? There is an overwhelming body of empirical evidence that suggests the Earth actually goes through warming and cooling periods based on cycles of luminosity of our Sun and other factors such as C02. There is also evidence that assertions regarding hurricane frequency, temperature increases and sea level increases are simply incorrect, overstated or skewed. Even crazier, there is also evidence that by adding more carbon to the atmosphere, plants have a ready source of fertilizer and grow better, more abundantly. Did you know that Greenland used to be so fertile and lush that the Vikings colonized it heavily until it froze over approximately 700 years ago? Did we as humans cause the Earth to freeze by our lack of C02 emissions? Unlikely. There are thousands of years worth of evidence in lake sediment, rock and ice strata that points to another mechanism of warming and cooling of our Earth and that it is normal. Did you know that the Earth was warming before the Industrial Revolution? Did you know that the ice receding on Kilimanjaro is most likely caused by a lack of rainfall due to temperatures dropping, not increasing? Temperatures there have fallen since 1979, not rising as asserted by An Inconvenient Truth.
Moreover, what is this major cataclysm that we are hurtling towards? Can anyone tell me? Is it another ice age? Is it heat induced drought? Do we even really know? Can we even realistically predict these outcomes on a geologic timescale with any certainty? Are we going crazy?
Recently, a documentary has been released as a rebuttal to An Inconvenient Truth called Not Evil, Just Wrong. I haven’t watched it yet, but I think that it’s worth watching and debating the cause of global warming. There simply isn’t much of a voice for those who are in disagreement over just how and why it’s happening or what to do about it. This lack of public debate is a dangerous leap of faith as we are hurtling towards a treaty that will allow another country to impose economic sanctions on all developed nations based on an issue that is not clearly understood, and based on a cause that is potentially incorrect. Assuming the theory is totally correct, has anyone even bothered to ask what would happen if we were to simply slow industrialization or our economy due to heavy taxes or simply by order of a foreign government? We could face worldwide, catastrophic poverty and death. We could face too much power in too few hands.
Have we stopped to debate these issues?
A debate on this is necessary to achieve good science. To accept the first hypothesis put forth is in itself faulty science and more akin to religion. I’m not going to write an entire dissertation the issue, but these have been just some of my thoughts and concerns. Everyone should do some more research. The skeptics are out there. I just drink coffee and write movies.
Reading…