An Inconvenient truth, or an inconvenient lie?
With all of the hullaballu in the media about global warming and Al Gore’s stance on it, I’ve been getting rather sick of the lies on this topic. The bare facts of the mater are that it is NOT a unanimous agreement among scientists that global warming both exists AND is caused by human beings. In the extended section of the article, I’ve included a video, over an hour long, that shows several scientists who disagree with the idea that global warming is caused by humans.
Which runs in direct contradiction to some of Al Gore’s long winded speeches in his official appearance before congress. He was to speak on global warming, but mixed in a fair amount of spiel on war, tax schemes, health care, and a number of other topics all in a 17+ minute ‘introduction’ during which he also claimed, once again, that global warming is a scientifically accepted fact, and that all scientists support it, and that it is caused by humans.
Now, I’m not saying that there is no global warming at present. I’m just saying that humans aren’t the main influence upon it, if we’re any real influence at all.
April 5th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Let us assume that one of the following assumptions is wrong.
We assume that global warming is a disaster in waiting and attempt to reduce pollutants in the atmosphere to no effect on rising temperatures, but we scrub a lot of crap out of the air we’re trying to breathe.
We assume that global warming is a natural process and does not pose a threat. We all die as we render the planet uninhabitable.
I’ve learned to not assume that global warming is the result of our idiot ancestors, but I choose to support any and all efforts in cleaning up the atmosphere regardless, in case we are wrong and inaction proves lethal.
April 5th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Ah, but do you support those efforts to clean up the global air that include preventing Africa from industrializing "just in case" and putting a tax on CO2 emissions "just in case"?
I’m all for cleaning toxins and so forth out of our air by passing measures that lead to reductions in our own toxic output. What I’m not for is hefty fines on a gas that we, dying plants, and the oceans all produce in great amounts anyway, or preventing other countries from industrializing with political pressure.
What’s next, making cows illegal because cow farts contain methane?
April 5th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
YES! :p
All extremist views are invalid. Even the extremist view that extremist views are all bad. PARADOX!