An Inconvenient Truth?

The calender says March, but it's a cold, snowy day here in the northeast, and I can't think of a better time to discuss Global Warming, and some of it's surrounding issues.

We have all heard a lot about the subject, and probably formed a fairly strong opinion on the issue, and your view is usually based on your political affiliation, as well as your choice of news medium, if you are a CNN watcher, it's likely you're a strong believer that man made global warming is a serious problem, and we need to stop putting all that CO2 into the atmosphere as soon as possible. If on the other hand, you watch Fox News on a regular basis and listen to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity on the radio, you're probably not all that alarmed, and may even believe the whole global warming thing is a hoax.

I am not a scientist and will not pretend to be one here, and I will not give an opinion on the matter one way or the other. I will tell you that there is a tremendous amount of information out there on the subject, and will give my thoughts on some of the things I have learned in my journey into this fascinating subject.

First off, if you doubt global warming at all, don't waste your time watching An Inconvenient Truth, this is not to say that what Al Gore has to say isn't true, but if you are skeptical going in, he doesn't do a very good job of convincing you, he spends a small amount of time explaining the science of how carbon dioxide warms the earth, but most of the film is the affects and possible future affects if the warming continues, if your not buying into the "cause", the "effects" seem rather meaningless.

Global warming doubters have a documentary of their own, The Great Global Warming Swindle was first aired by British TVs Channel 4, and parts of it are available on YouTube and other similar websites, this film does a far better job explaining the science, showing why they don't believe it and giving an alternative theory. They reason that the sun and sun spots are the greatest contributor to climate change, and show some graphs backing up their point. The second half of the presentation deals with how such a controversial scientific theory is so widely accepted in the mainstream as fact, how it became a political topic and some of the affects that global warming alarmist have on the developing world.

Following up on this seemingly far more convincing documentary, I have found that many scientists find the evidence put forth in the film to be questionable at best, including one who was featured in the documentary, saying that his opinion was misrepresented and would like all his parts removed before the film is shown again.

An interesting thing about the subject is the incredibly wide range of opinions that are out there, with just about everyone showing how the science proves their theory to be correct. There is the U.N.s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), who strongly believe in man made global warming. There are deniers some even claiming that over the past decade the world has cooled. And another group of people have decided that they cannot decide, and will err on the side of caution. One of the more interesting views I came across is that of the late Michael Crichton, who wrote the novel Jurassic Park that was later turned into a blockbuster movie, he says that while the world is getting warmer, and humans are contributing to it, the affect is minimal, so there is no serious immediate threat and there are other more important thing to worry about.

The IPCC says that CO2 is causing warming by trapping heat, almost like a blanket around earth. The deniers say that the warming which occurs naturally, causes more CO2 to be taken from earth and put in the atmosphere. The deniers claim that, we have had warmer temperature not all that long ago. The believers say that is faulty information, and temperature going back quite some time would look like a hockey stick, minor fluctuations over a long period representing the stick, and the sudden rise being the blade shooting straight up. Each side would have you believe that the other has ulterior motives, either being controlled by environmentalist or being paid off by major oil companies.

One non science question that still remained is, that with all the skepticism out there, and many reputable scientist denying it, why has global warming been reported as a fact in the news media, and accepted by so many as the truth. Everyone from politicians to major companies have spoken about our carbon footprint and going green as if it is an uncontested fact.

The answer as far as I can tell is that human nature is to look for a story, the next time someone comes up to you and asks "what's up?" simply respond "not much" and see how long the conversation goes. The news media has a vested interest in making things into major stories, more people watch TV, listen to radio and read newspapers if there is a major story going on. Climatologist have jobs because we think studying these things are important, if they were to come out and say there isn't much going on as far as climate is concerned, no one would pay any attention to them, and in time they may end up losing their job, that doesn't mean their studies are wrong but we can't forget who the studiers are. Businesses are about making money by keeping people happy, and if a decent number of their costumers demand something, they understand that they cannot afford to lose them and will therefore oblige, regardless of what they think of the science, plus you will not get a major objection from the deniers if your business does go green.

One of the reasons it has become so popular among the people, who may only like to hear one side of the story, is that many people like to get back at "the man". Some of us like to believe that the big important people are scheming against the average guy in a dark shady room somewhere. Many of the so called important people are the rich business owners, and global warming activists like to pick on big business as one of the main causes of climate change, so this becomes another avenue to fight them, and who could argue when we're talking about saving our planet.

For some of the above reasons many people conclude the science of global warming guilty by association, claiming the only people who believe it are loony lefties and wacko environmentalists, which would just be unfair to the many credible people who have studied and have reason to believe it.

There is so much information out there, on both sides of the ball, that each topic touched on can really be a full post by itself, I decided to condense it all into one post and give a bit on each part. As I said I'm not a scientist and will therefore not give an opinion one way or the other, but I do recommend that you look into the subject and give both sides a fair chance, and I hope you enjoy learning about this topic, I certainly did.