I encourage you to be more open minded about this subject and to thoroughly investigate the real data that is available. That is what scientists are supposed to do: examine the evidence and draw conclusions. Politicians are the ones who draw conclusions and then try to find the evidence to match.
Take for example the fact that Mars has also been warming. How many humans are there on Mars? How many SUVs and smoke spewing factories?
Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News
February 28, 2007
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.
Read the whole story here.
I guess the (obviously) politically motivated Al Gore forgot to mention that kind of information in his propaganda movie.
What about Dr. Roy Spencer a research scientist and former Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA (you know, the National Aeronautic and Space Administration – big right wing nut jobs, right?)
"The people that have built the climate models that predict global warming believe they have sufficient physics in those models to predict the future. I believe they don't. I believe the climate system, the weather as it is today in the real world shows a stability that they do not yet have in those climate models."
Read more about Dr. Spencer here.
So, you see, there is a debate and it has been politicized so it really is no longer a scientific question but, rather, a political one where people with anti-capitalist agendas are spreading fear in order to rationalize taking more of our freedom away all in the name of saving the planet when no salvation is necessary.
My opinion that it is an anti-capitalist agenda at work comes from the evidence within the supposed solutions proposed by the environmentalist groups. They insist that government must force all of us into certain behaviors (stop driving big cars, buy only certain kinds of light bulbs, force landowners to give up property for use as wind farms, burn food (corn) instead of fossil fuels, etc). But nowhere do these supposed friends of the Earth mention one of the most efficient forms of clean energy: nuclear energy. I surmise from that exclusion that they are not really interested in sustaining or expanding our energy needs but, instead, are more interested in micro-managing our lives to force us into certain lifestyles that we would not naturally choose for ourselves.
Nuclear energy is the most efficient and effective source of power that we have on the planet. If 20-something year-old Navy sailors are smart enough to safely maintain MOBILE nuclear reactors in our ships and submarines then why is it that you brilliant scientists can't bring yourselves to propose that as an alternative? Answer: because your science has been hijacked by politics and it isn't "politically correct" to embrace nuclear technology since Jane Fonda's China Syndrome.
Now that you have taken it upon yourself to defend these anti-freedom, politically motivated forces, perhaps you can answer this question for me: Why are you so afraid of freedom?
1 comment:
Actually, I am right about there being no debate over the existence of global warming. I think you misunderstood my last post. I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that the earth is experiencing a shift in overall climate and is in fact warming. Now, a debate certainly does exist over the cause of this change, be it human-influenced or something outside our control.
I would like to sit here and write a really long post, but I have an audition in a few hours, plus I'm moving to a new apartment today. But I will say this: How could you possibly think humans would have no influence on the climate when it is KNOWN that carbon dioxide is a "greenhouse gas" and has the effect that that name implies from looking at other planets (Venus, for exmaple), and it is known that human beings are a HUGE source of carbon dioxide emission. Not to mention the fact that over many centuries and especially the last century we have continued to destroy many of the world's carbon sinks (places in nature that in essence absorb carbon-for example rainforests, the oceans, etc.) When you add these two things up (very high carbon emission plus reduction of carbon sinks) it's pretty easy to imagine we would have some sort of effect. To look at what is happening now, turn your head, and place blame elsewhere is not only incredibly short-sighted, but a severe disservice to your children and their future. I think America is a great country in many ways, but I think one of its greatest problem is a general lack of foresight when it comes to pending problems. Instead of planning for the future and changing things NOW, we'd rather continue to live our lives the way we always have until the problems are so severe they cannot be ignored and are usually much more difficult to solve. This is such an immature way of living! What would be so bad about living cleaner, more efficient lives?? Why does that scare so many people?? I realize that not all the "green" ideas are good ones, but humans beings are incredibly creative and have always been able to solve problems with great ingenuity. The way we live now is not sustainable and if you wanted to put a Christian spin on it, I would say it's also incredibly disrespectful of god's gift. Humans are supposed to be the stewards of the earth, as discussed in the parable of the good steward in Luke 12:41-48 and the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30.
Ok, I've already spent too much time on this. I gotta go warm up my voice. Ciao!
Post a Comment