With all the hoopla floating about on global warming being bogus is not surprising to me. I’ve read various treaties from different scientists about how greenhouse gasses will cause warming that will threaten the planet. Most of the arguments were very shallow and did not carry lots of factual data. It’s almost like I have a college degree in _____________ you better believe me. There are two things that come to mind; a physics graduate, working for the government, wrote a series of articles explaining how greenhouse heating works, second is on WordPress, a space called Watts Up with That, they publish data collected around the world and from that point out flaws of the global warming theory.
The physicist was very articulate in explaining how greenhouse gases work. One of his key arguments is the covering of a greenhouse to retain the heat. Right there raises a red flag, this planet does not have a roof and the atmosphere will not function like one.
Watt’s up with that, takes raw data and posts it from various government sites and use the data as they see the story the data is generating. This is interesting because it is some of the same data pro warming people use. The conflict alone raises a red flag for me.
Years ago when I started college I was going to major in Forestry. I studied the sciences until I was dreaming equations. There was botany, chemistry, zoology and then more classes in greater depth. Only thing, college was interrupted for lack of funds etc. So I went off the war and learned to do battle with bunk beds and early morning calls. I returned to college some years later and my major changed. I got a liberal art degree in general studies. This went from physical science to behavioral science, what a change but my love for the sciences never waned. I love geology and the flora and fauna and took various classes throughout life.
So when I look at the global warming issue I can look at it with a fairly discerning eye. There are theories and there are ways to prove them. If somebody else takes similar data and comes up with different results the theory becomes questionable and quite often goes into the rubble pile of almost thoughts. One of the keys to this is providing the formulas to others to verify. Einstein’s E=MC2 is available to anybody and is consistent in its results. The global warming theorists could not do this and withheld lots of data. Science is an absolute, black and white process that can provide gray areas.
One of the problems lies in schooling. Lots of people do not like sciences and try to avoid taking them in school. There lots of stuff put out there is just accepted by lots of people because they do not have a background of any type in the sciences.
One way to put a different light on things is to watch stories going on about the past. I watched a program about the Vikings a while back. They were world travelers in the early 1100’s to 1400’s. They raised lots of havoc with their European neighbors but they also explored new countries that Europe did not know of, one of them being Greenland and east coast of Canada.
The Vikings found an inlet along the southern coast of Greenland where they were able to settle and set up a colony of farmers. Farming in Greenland, this place had a long enough growing season they could raise crops and sustain the settlement. Go to this part of Greenland and one would probably find only ice there today. It is that very reason why the area was abandoned by the Vikings. The climate had changed, Greenland became colder and the growing season was no longer long enough.
Now this means there had been global warming prior to the Viking’s settlement or was there global cooling, forcing them to leave. If one studies the geology one can see these cycles in nature, moving from ice ages to tropical climates in the same geographical areas.
My question is; as man, do we have that much influence on nature’s weather patterns? Solar flares pack a weather punch and big volcano explosions also. To equal volcano explosions how much junk would we have to put into the atmosphere to come close. In the 60’s and 70’s we were close but there was no global warming then. In the late 1800’s Europe was burning lots of coal for heating and industrialization. No global warming back then.
Then there are nature’s carbon generators. In British Columbia there is a forest that is dying because of a tree disease, the carbon it emits from decay is about equal to over a dozen cola fired power plants. Global warming scientists do not even mention that. Then there is Al Gore’s home state. Right in his back yard is one of nature’s largest carbon generators, The Great Smoky Mountains. That smoky haze that hangs over them is the result of dead and decaying organic matter. The Smoky Mountains generate more carbon then numerous coal fired power plants. There are questions that are not being answered or even discussed. This is not the first be fear tactic that has been used and there will probably be more. Will the sky be falling or will it be a real threat?
There is an interesting relationship between animals, man being one, and plants. As we breathe we take in oxygen, among other things, and exhale carbon dioxide. We also emit carbon gasses in other modes. The tree breathes also but just the opposite. Trees take in Carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen, nature’s process of keeping a balance in the atmosphere along with rain. Our breathing is very important for plants as is the breathing of plants is important to us. So if carbon was the culprit, one solution is to plant more trees or………… Plants are great carbon eaters and rain is a great clenser of carbon from the air. These issues set on the back page or in footnotes.
The whole discussion of global warming has been so contrived. Hopefully people will ask questions and not just accept things. To challenge things has been a mark of progress, to accept things is a sign of stagnation……hum swamp gas, burp.
Air pollution is not just a man made, nature does a pretty good job of polluting also. It becomes a way of cleaning out things and what we give ourselves credit for is but a piece of nature telling us it is still in control.
There is a new class of society arising that is becoming very pompous. They have been referred to as the ruling elite. They have the notion that they know what is right for mankind and the peasants do not have any concepts of how to live their lives. This issue of global warming is but one aspect of the arrogance of this group of people. The global warming people said people would die from floods, temperature changes and other induced catastrophes. Mankind is a pretty adaptable being, living under temperature extremes of 50 degrees below freezing to over 120 degrees F, to living in space and under the ocean. To have the notion that as a group of beings we are that stupid is outlandish, we have a fair amount of common sense. I don’t know of too many people staying in an area of imminent danger.
The ruling elites will continue to create stories that put them in the light that they know best. Wonder what their next will be?