The Global Warming Debate: The Debate Still Exists

You may have heard that the debate is over, that global warming is fact and now is the time to act. Perhaps you heard it from the lips of Al Gore in a documentary you watched, and if not, you are likely to have heard it from any and every media outlet. However, despite what many would have you believe, global warming is not a theory that is set in stone, and considerable scientific dissent still exists. It's hard to find to find such sources, as most news stations are unlikely to present the other side in fear of being panned, (although some notable exceptions come to mind, such as Stossel on 20/20) however, if you simply type in a few key words, such as "global warming debate" or "global warming dissent" or any other related search, into Google or Youtube, you'll find all these hidden gems covering the other side of the issue.

You may have been told that our industrialization in this country is destroying the environment, that we are emitting greenhouse gases that get trapped in our atmosphere and cause our planet to warm. Well, this is only partly true. It is true that much of what we do emits carbon dioxide, from making cars to breathing. However, this doesn't mean much in terms of planet temperature. In fact, more carbon dioxide is emitted from decaying leaves in the fall than all human effort combined. Human effort contributes only 0.28% of greenhouse gas. Not that it matters, since carbon dioxide doesn't even constitute that much of the greenhouse gases emitted on this planet. Actually, 95% of greenhouse gas is composed simply of water vapor. Not to mention, that from that minute amount carbon dioxide that we and all the other creatures do emit, not only does industry constitute a tiny percentage of that, but an even smaller percentage of that is actually trapped in that atmosphere, no more than the natural amount that should be. The rest is released. Don't believe me? Look up the information for yourself.

So where do we get this notion that CO2 closely parallels global temperature, that when CO2 rises our planet warms, and when it falls our planet cools? There are graphs everywhere, including a very large, and seemingly prolific, one Al Gore likes to show with his slideshow. Actually, the graphs are accurate, CO2 does parallel temperature very closely. However, if you take a look at those graphs a little closer, if you just examine them with a little more detail before taking them as proof, you'll notice that CO2 actually lags a bit behind temperature. What that means is that the temperature change comes first, and the CO2 changes occurs after as a result of temperature, not the other way around. In fact, on all data sets that you see involving temperature models, take a look at the numbers and make sure that neither axis has been regressed. By changing a formula around, you can really make anything you want appear in numbers, you can make warming look like cooling and vice versa.

You may be wondering what the big deal is, we may as well go green before we run out of other resources, right? No harm, right? Incorrect. Lord Christopher Monckton has been touring the country giving lectures on the false math and science behind global warming. (He is also the creator of the Eternity and the Eternity II puzzle, the latter of which is still offering a $2 million prize to the first person who solves it.) Aside from the rigorous data collection he does, exposing fraud, he talks about how harmful a false scientific notion can be. He begins his lecture with a quick anecdote about DDT, a well used pesticide in the early 20^th century. In the 1940s and 50s, a small group of scientist began to believe that DDT may have some possible hazards. This received little attention until 1962, when a woman named Rachel Carson published a book called Silent Spring, in which she argued that pesticides were hurting the environment and were very harmful to humans. The book became a national bestseller, launching the modern environmental movement and gathering the attention of Kennedy and his administration. As a result, DDT was banned. While it caused little concern in the U.S., on the international level, DDT was used as a cheap pesticide in all parts of the world, mainly Africa, to prevent malaria carrying mosquitoes from coming into houses. As a result, people were no longer able to get this cheap pesticide until very recently, when the ban was lifted. From then till now, tens of millions of Africans have died from malaria. Till this day no serious hazardous effects have been substantially proven.

What does this mean for us? Economically speaking, this means the "greening of America," the closing of many productive plants and businesses, based on a theory that still has considerable dissent. This dissent comes from the world's top scientists. In fact, the scientists that worked on the IPCC report (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the very document that every global warming enthusiast cites, even those scientists disagree with global warming. These "top 2500 scientists" many of them simply contributed research about the topic, even opposing it, and while their research was not included in the IPCC report, their names were listed, since they still "contributed research." Many have had to sue to get their names off the list. Others don't bother with the cumbersome process.

So what about these facts thrown out at you, like the fact that polar bear numbers in Alaska are decreasing? Actually, polar bear numbers have more than doubled in that last decade. (Not to mention that despite what people think, polar bears adapt quite well to warmer climates.) Yes, glaciers may be breaking off into the sea, but that is a natural cyclical occurrence. What usually happens is when one polar ice cap warms, the other might cool, but what news station will report on cooling. Glaciers break off and freeze again, that's what they do, that's what they've been doing before we were around with our cars. Sea levels have not increased any more than they should and Greenland isn't melting, in fact it is still rising as it always has been. No one doubts that the earth goes through periods when it warms. However, it also cyclically goes through periods when it cools. If one looks at temperature records throughout history there have been periods, such as what scientist call the "Medieval Warm Period" around the 11^th century, where the earth has warmed to temperatures even higher than now, when we couldn't possibly have anything to do with it. (Some prominent global warming models conveniently leave out this period.)

So we come back to the question: what's the big deal? Well, aside from losing unnecessary jobs in a time of economic crisis, we must remember DDT and Africa. When we use alternate fuel sources from agriculture, such as corn, we eliminate much of agricultural product for the use of food. This causes food prices to rise, they have actually doubled in the last several years. This is small change for us, since they weren't that high, relatively speaking, to begin with. However, we now have a problem with feeding people in third world countries, who have depended in the past on the food coming from our country. Even now, people in Africa are dying because they can no longer afford to buy food, living now off mud cakes that barely keep them alive. This problem can only get worse as we divert more and more resources away from agriculture for consumption.

Our current resources, such as coal, oil, and nuclear power, are also the most efficient sources we have for energy. Efficiency means cheap. To replace them with inefficient and costly energy coming from wind and solar power seems, again, ridiculous in a time of crisis. Again, let us once again consider the third world countries who even now are losing the ability to afford energy and heat in their homes, and are thus dying from smoke inhalation caused by making fires in poorly ventilated homes, as well as the other problems they have to face. Few stop to consider what doesn't affect them directly.

To make matters worse, science opposing global warming now just doesn't seem to get any funding. It's almost scandalous to go public with such an idea. How can truth ever be found then? In no way am I trying to say a conspiracy exists. However, global warming is a theory, like any other, and considerable scientific dissent exists with much data to back it up. In fact, Lord Monckton asked to debate Al Gore on that science and he refused. There are many resources available and I encourage everyone to look up this information for yourselves. Google and Youtube are obvious wonderful resources. A wonderful documentary exists entitled "The Great Global Warming Swindle" that I believe is available on Google Video and can explain all this and more better than I could. Don't hesitate to question what you see, and look at the science first and foremost.