How real is global warming?
One of the most contentious debates in our time is the debate over global warming and it’s supposed causes. It seems that most of the far left liberals in the world all want to blame human beings (that’s you and me) for global warming. So far, they have done a pretty good job of doing that, but that may be about to change.
For several days, I have been hearing about e-mails that have been hacked from the database of some of the leading proponents of global warming. From what I have been able to ascertain, the data that these proponents have been using to prove their case against humans as the major cause for global warming has been somewhat cooked. Most of the mainstream media has not been covering this story, but The New York Times has it’s own take on it, published on November 20.
The e-mail messages, attributed to prominent American and British climate researchers, include discussions of scientific data and whether it should be released, exchanges about how best to combat the arguments of skeptics, and casual comments — in some cases derisive — about specific people known for their skeptical views. Drafts of scientific papers and a photo collage that portrays climate skeptics on an ice floe were also among the hacked data, some of which dates back 13 years.
For a long time, those of us who do not fall into the category of believers, as it pertains to global
warming, have said that some of the hype surrounding the issue was exactly that, just hype. The e-mails that have been releases seem to bear that out. That is not to say I do not believe we should take care of our planet, As a matter of fact, I believe that is something God would want us to do, as good stewards of his creation. It just means that we should use some common sense about it, instead of buying into the hype that we are being sold.
This entire scenario reminds me of a campaign stop for Mike Huckabee in Iowa. It was very ironic to see the reports of global warming activists protesting how humans are causing the warming and how something has to be done. The ironic part was that there was about two feet of snow on the ground at the time. It was obvious that someone didn’t think that protest through and I have to wonder if some of these people are just blindly buying into the theory, without giving it some thought themselves.
Global Warming??
For starters, those who support the idea that we humans are the sole cause of global warming would like us to believe the world is about to suffer great catastrophe, if we do not act yesterday to prevent the Earth from warming further. What bothers me more than anything is how these e-mails, dating back several years, seem to point to a hiding or discrediting of data that does not agree with the going theory about global warming.At the same time, they are making the fight against global warming into an industry. Do you suppose that is because it is profitable?
So, how real is global warming? You would think we could leave that decision up to scientists who have training in that area, but that is apparently not the case. A lot of them seem to have an agenda of their own, an agenda that includes cooking the data to make global warming seem more ominous than it really is. So let’s take care of our planet, but let’s not necessarily buy into the theory that global warming is the greatest looming disaster in the history of mankind.
IGood post Larry! I’ve always shared a bit of skepticism about global warming but then I come back to three things: first, we need to aggressively pursue alternative energy and energy independence, regardless of whether the hype over global warming is accurate or not, for national security reasons and to address exponentially increasing demand; second, we need to take care of our home, planet Earth, because we know what happens when we don’t — it’s all around us in garbage mountains at landfills, increasing numbers of threatened and extinct species, flithy rivers and lakes, etc. ; and third, if those crying that the sky is falling are correct then we are toast and no amount of apology will come in time to change a slide into global disaster. Enacting laws today to address some of these issues makes sense for us all.
Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family and to all the loyal readers of Political Realities!
I agree, Mike. We certainly need to take care of our planet. The best thing I believe we as a country can do as a whole is to address our dependence on foreign oil. It’s a shame that it hasn’t already been done.
Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family as well.
I have never taken the global warming debate as being anything more than a theory with many proponents having an axe to grind. Al Gore, of course is a ring leader.
I do believe that our dependency on foreign sources of oil should be greatly reduced both for cost and security reasons. I’m not big on wind farms (they’re ugly and kill birds), but I would like to see our country use more nuclear power plants just as France has done.
You won’t see me driving an econo box at the expense to my family’s safety and comfort. I do like EcoBoost engines from Ford which put smaller, yet powerful engines under the hood while yielding less pollution and good fuel economy.
Matt Keegan´s last blog ..Reconnecting With Your Readers, Blogging Style
Often the “Sky is Falling” works, but it only works for a while and then the people realize they have been had. And the acorn is exposed (I like that) for what it is just an acorn and not a piece of the sky. I do know this, no one know what the weather will be next year much less a hundred years for now. Now thats a fact you can count on.
Ron Russell´s last blog ..Obama’s First State Dinner and General McCrystal
I am with you Larry. I agree that we need to take care of the planet, I am not against being environmentally conscience, but I do not believe that global warming is real. You can be a global warminc skeptic and still care about the environment. I also agree with Mike that we should look into alternative fuel, not because it will save the planet from this hoax but because if we have more energy sources the price of energy will come down. We will all win.
Having said that, I have taken great pleasure in the fact that these people have finally been exposed. I have always been of the belief that skeptical scientists have been silenced, I have written several post that have feature scientists who were skeptics but were not allowed to voice their opinions for fear of losing federal grant money. You are exactly right, this has turned into a profitable industry and as such, proof has beeen covered up and destroyed that show us that glabal warming may not be real. Science has gone out the window in order to promote this agenda. This is a huge story and when trillions of dollars are on the line we have to hope that it won’t be swept under the rug.
Mr Pink Eyes´s last blog ..Navy Seals face court martial for capturing a most wanted terrorist
I would be interesting in what people think is “taking care of our planet”. My problem with the global warming debate is that it has become yet another bashing club between our major parties…The left may have a “sky is falling” mentality, but the right is busy (and loudly) proclaiming stupid things like CO2 is not a pollutant and distilling the issue down to cow farts. Childish…
There are things to be done, some of them for national security reasons (as Mike pointed out) and some that are just good common sense. I’m not sure when good environmental stewardship became so polarizing, and I really don’t care. I cannot take seriously folks who would deny a problem because it is more politically profitable for them to do so. I would be more apt to listen to reasoned arguments is those making them didn’t say “Al Gore” every third phrase…And if they actually made some.
Larry, you state “It seems that most of the far left liberals in the world all want to blame human beings (that’s you and me) for global warming.” I found some “far left liberal” thinking…
“We must also produce more vehicles that operate on electricity and natural gas, both to reduce demand for oil and to cut CO2 emissions.”
“By increasing our American energy supply and decreasing the long term demand for oil, we will be
well positioned to address the challenge of climate change and continue our longstanding responsibility for stewardship over the environment.”
“The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also
increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. While the scope and long term consequences of this are the subject of ongoing scientific research, common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment”
Where did I get all this leftist crap? From the 2008 RNC platform, of course. I Hmmm…As an election strategy, labeling serious, human-caused pollutants as “common sense” makes a lot of sense. So why has the Republican/conservative argument truned almost entirely toward denial that any problem even exists now, instead of toward finding solutions acceptable to all?
The need to beat Obama, at all costs-even at the cost of our Earth, perhaps? Disgusting.
Laurie you make some good points, however I must point out that few are against acting responsible when it comes to the environment and most do their part in an individual way. The search for clean energy should continue, but not at the expense of our way of life. We do need to pass on a clean environment to our children, but we also need to pass on a prosperous America one in which they can provide for themselves and their familes. Granted both sides in this important debate are using hype and thats too bad. This issue however remains, is man causing global warming, does global warming really exist. These things remain in doubt and contrarary to some the debate is not settled. Many are out to make a fast buck at the expense of all and its these folks who worry me the most. Will we all have to pay for something that in the end may not even exist.
Ron Russell´s last blog ..Obama Faces White Flight
Ron,
You say
“This issue however remains, is man causing global warming, does global warming really exist.”
I say that’s not really the issue. Would it make a difference if we simply ditched the politically charged terminology “global warming” and simply talked about “dirty air”? We have it. The effects of too much CO2 on human health is indisputed. So why can’t we just focus on the issue, rather than the politics?
You say …”things remain in doubt…”
I say, in the polticially polarized world we live in , they always will. Should we sit on our butts and do nothing until the argument is settled? And, as Mike says, what if those with doubts are wrong? We don’t find out until it’s too late.
My point: Once upon a time (oh, a short 7 months ago), both sides agreed we had “dirty air”. both sides agreed that CO2 emissions were a major cause. Each side had some valid points about what to do; some were the same, some were very different.
So- why can’t we just start with that which used to be a given and MOVE ON to that which is truly in dispute? If the GOP had true statesmen who really cared about Americans, they’d be in there swinging, leading their masses to the best way to combat the problem. Instead, they’re threatening to boycott any legislative debate (which TOTALLY abandons their base) and choosing to lead their base into denial about it all.
Time after time after time this is how the GOP responds and even leads. “No!” is the only word they know, and it’s a simpleton’s way to govern.
Laurie,
I know you are not a fan of the Republican Party and that is your prerogative. They have done a lot of things that I do not agree with as well. However, this is not about the Republican Party and it is not their fault that the debate has descended to this level.. It is about global warming alarmists, activists, or whatever you choose to call them being flat out dishonest with the real data. They have told us for years that the sky is falling and that they had the data to prove it. Turns out, the data was construed to produce the results they wanted it to produce. That is not real science, but rather an attempt to mislead the general public.
You say we need to move on and take positive action and I agree. You seem to be blaming the lack of action on the Republican Party, but I don’t think that is completely the case here. Yes, the Republicans have been castigated in the media and by the Democrats for standing firm against the cap and tax legislation that has been introduced in Congress. I can’t say as I blame them for doing that. That legislation would be a complete and total disaster to the average citizen of this country. You say they only know the word “No”, but how can you or anyone else expect them to engage in an honest debate when they can not start out on a level playing field because of the misleading information being put out.
Larry,
My point is that both “sides” of this seem to be happy to mislead the public. Still wading through the email situation, but it doesn’t quell my uneasiness that this will be used as yet another excuse for many to turn away from the real issues in favor of the sensational. Meanwhile, the air just gets dirtier…And politics is at the heart of the problem.
Cap and trade and the Republicans is yet another situation where (when it was their idea) was a great one, but when it became the domain of the DNC, it smells. From the 2004 RNC party platform:
“We support President Bush’s Clear Skies proposal to reduce power plant emissions. Clear Skies, through a proven cap-and-trade system, will reduce by 70% emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury. The market-based policies in Clear Skies will help states meet new, more stringent standards to protect public health. The plan also provides regulatory certainty, enabling power plants to install state-of-the-art pollution control technologies. ”
Yes, there are differences in the Dem plan vs the GOP’s. But you see what I mean, yes? All of a sudden, when they are no longer in control, the GOP “stands firm” (says NO!) to something they once told us was essential. And now they are led by sitting politicians who LOUDLY tell us there is no problem whatsoever. Seems suspicious, to me, and I’m growing tired of the excuses the GOP comes up with to back off what they once told us was necessary, just because it’s no longer “their” idea.
The politics of the situation, the game of partisan ping-pong, the very need to WIN on both sides is the biggest danger we all face. Time for grown ups on both sides o take deep breaths (while they can), get to the negotiating table with what we once agreed on, and work out the details.
Laurie:
we will be
well positioned to address the challenge of climate change
I think the gist of the article was “what climate change?” If you’re talking pollution, that’s a different subject.
rjjrdq´s last blog ..Doug Hoffman Re-concedes
I hear you. My point? I think we need to back off “climate change”, “global warming” etc as these are politically charged, polarizing expressions that allow the partisan fight to continue even as the air pollutants rise.
Anybody remember in the 70s, when our parks, freeways and roads were littered with the debris of human convenience? Rather than attack the very obvious situation from a “chicken little” approach, we simply banded together, made the dumping of stuff illegal and unacceptable, and moved forward. We lived in a country (50s and 60s) where nobody thought twice about tossing garbage out their car windows and leaving it where it dropped in parks etc. Today, we’d never think of doing that and there are big fines if we do. Of course, that was something everybody could see…too bad CO2 is so darn transparent.
The most amazing thing about these emails is that suddenly people are shocked to find the so-called “objective scientist” are cooking the books. These guys are supported lock stock and barrel by the government and politicials who have an agenda. They are aware of who puts the bread on the table and will NOT bite the hands that feeds. So please spare me, a blind man could see this coming—-the scientific community has NO objectivity when it comes to going against those who provide their GRANTS.
Ron Russell´s last blog ..Blind Loyalty