Global warming according to many is a serious issue. This issue is so serious that between the sixth and twelfth of December a new treaty will be signed. That treaty is the Copenhagen Treaty. It is most likely just about every country in the World will sign this treaty. Some are of the belief that the treaty is a backdoor signing for a World government (conspiracy theory?). We have a question though. Has anyone seen a programme, documentary, etc on a position against the current wisdom on global warming?
Therefore, what is global warming and why all the noise? Global warming according to Allianz Knowledge (http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/globalissues/climate_change/global_warming_basics/global_warming_definition.html) is the increase of the average temperature on Earth. This means that as the Earth is getting hotter, disasters like hurricanes, droughts and floods are getting more frequent.
According to the Natsource website, (http://www.natsource.com/) defines Global Warming “as the progressive gradual rise of the earth's surface temperature thought to be caused by the greenhouse effect and responsible for changes in global climate patterns. In other words, this means an increase in the near surface temperature of the Earth. Global warming has occurred in the distant past as the result of natural influences, but the term is most often used to refer to the warming predicted to occur because of increased emissions of greenhouse gases. ”
Before we continue, we must not forget to define what a greenhouse gas is. Again, according to the Natsource web site, a greenhouse gas is “any gas that absorbs infra-red radiation in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases include water vapour, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), halogenated fluorocarbons (HCFCs), ozone (O3), per fluorinated carbons (PFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).”
Our final definition is the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect is the increasing temperature of the Earth’s surface caused by gases in the atmosphere. These gases allow solar radiation to penetrate, but they absorb the infrared (heat) radiation instead of allowing it to be radiated into space. This definition is from the carbondescent web site (http://www.carbondescent.org.uk/).
All the activity of global warming has been attributed to human activity in one form or another. One would expect that the media in any country would present an important issue such as global warming from both sides of the argument. Nevertheless, we ask a simple question, has anyone really seen a descent discussion programme from an anti-global warming point of view? We think not! Moreover, even if you do, it would be a sound bite or two. Sound bites you would not even remember if asked five minutes later.
One of the most prominent international bodies on climate change is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This is the body quoted just about all the time on there being a consensus on climate science. It is now known that there is no consensus on the science. The hero of the environmental movement, Nobel laureate and former Vice-President of the US, Al Gore, is quite fond of arguing on the consensus point of view. You can see him in action in Alex Jones’s film “Fall of the Republic” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU).
We now know that eighty percent of the members of the IPCC are not weather scientists (http://uddebatt.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/ipcc-80-percent-of-its-members-where-not-climate-scientists/). We also know that these people do not accept peer review recommendations on any of their publications. Just imagine a group of people writing about very serious topics and yet not allowing peer reviews. If you are not convinced, then you should go to the following link: (http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb) or here: (http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/2007/12/members-of-un-ipcc-dispute-al-gore/).
One man who is asking the questions and challenging the IPCC and other climate alarmists is Lord Christopher Monckton. Lord Monckton is the third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, and a British politician who served as an adviser to Mrs Margaret Thatcher. Lord Monckton has continually challenged Al Gore to a public debate on the issue of climate change and global warming. He was also instrumental in ensuring that an Inconvenient Truth was not shown in British schools through the High Court of Justice. As far as we know, Al Gore has not stepped up to the plate. We feel that if Gore is so sure of his science then he should step up and put Lord Monckton in his place.
Lord Monckton gave an hour and a half speech at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota. Here is the full speech: (http://www.libertysarmy.com/2009/10/16/global-warming/lord-christopher-monckton-president-obama-poised-to-cede-us-sovereignty/). For those who feel we are not giving Al Gore a fair shot then you can go to the following links: Climate Crisis (http://www.climatecrisis.net/) or the IPCC web site: (http://www.ipcc.ch/).
Before we conclude, we would like to bring to your attention a film that did not even get a tenth of the publicity an Inconvenient Truth received. The name of the documentary is “The Great Global Warming Swindle”. This documentary argues against the mainstream “scientific consensus” on climate change that global warming is very likely due to observed increases in man-made greenhouse gases. You can watch this documentary here if you so wish: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647#.
We conclude by saying that we are not trying to convince or persuade you in any way. We are saying that look at all sides of the argument and then make up your mind. We are saying think for yourself. We are saying even if you disagree with another’s point of view, then do not conclude it is rubbish or say nasty things because you cannot dismiss that point of view.
We are saying be careful because if we continue like this then what Zbigniew Brzezinski talked about in his book "Between Two Ages" will take place. He said, "Shortly, the public will be unable to reason or think for themselves. They'll only be able to parrot the information they've been given on the previous night's news."
No comments:
Post a Comment