Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Will Global Warming zealots apologize?
Published on February 15, 2007 By Draginol In Politics

Since 1975, the mean average recorded temperature world wide has increased slightly. Prior to that, it was actually cooling. That is, between 1940 and 1975 the earth was cooling.

Now, it could indeed turn out that the reason temperatures have increased is due to human impact on the environment.  CO2 is a greenhouse gas. And we're putting a lot of it in the air. We've significantly increased the amount in the atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolusion. What isn't known, however, is how much effect CO2 has on temperature. Anyone who claims they know is lying. It's an unknown and the various computer models basically take an educated guess as to what affect CO2 has on global temperatures. I.e. it's a "fudge factor". 

If I were a betting man, I would actually bet that CO2 isn't the cause of the increase in temperature. That doesn't mean I'm against reducing emmissions. I favor reasonable efforts to decrease human impact on the environment (though I am cynical enough to think that left-wing European politicians focus on CO2 in order to deflect from the amount of sulfur, soot, and heavy metals that Europe dumps into the air per capita compared to the US, Canada, and elsewhere).  But I am also not in favor of any sort of massive, immediate overhaul to our economy.

Global Warming theory is weak science.  The definition of weak science is whether it relies purely on consensus or not as opposed to scientific method. E=MC^2 is fact. It's been proven. Even evolution, which has its share of critics, works on proven scientific principles and has fossil evidence (don't hijack the discussion in the comments area about evolution).  Global warming, for instance, isn't even a theory. It's a hypothesis. CO2 is a green house gas. We put a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere. The temperature since 1975 has increased. Therefore, CO2 is the cause.  That's it.  That is basically the entire argument.  And they say it's the cause because there's a "scientific consensus" around it made by many people who have an economic reason to be in favor of it (just as there are those who have an economic incentive to oppose the CO2 hypothesis).  

If you've watched films like "An inconvenient truth" note how much time is given over to "proving" the temperature has increased (I don't know anyone who's arguing that it hasn't) and how much damage higher temperatuers would do to the Earth.  But how much is actually spent making the case that humans are the cause? Virtually no time. That's because the paragraph above states the entire case. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We create a lot of it. Temperatures have increased. It's sure a good thing there aren't any other..you know..inputs into our system like a massive fusion powered gas fire fall thousands of times larger than the Earth nearby sending terrajoles of energy into our system...but I digress..

So like I said, if I was a betting man, I would bet that CO2 isn't the cause of the slight global increase in temperatures. I think there are other, much more likely, possibilities such as increased solar activity or slight changes in the orbit of the Earth or tilt of the earth. 

I don't claim to be a scientist, but I am pretty good at analysing statistics.  And so, if in say 5, 10 years the mean global temperature starts to dip -- i.e. definitively dip like it was doing pre-1975 -- what will the environmentalist movement do? Given the hysteria over global warming, does anyone think for one moment that the environmentalist movement will say "Oops, we're sorry, we really have no idea what we're talking about."?  Or, would they simply come up with another "man made" reason that over-compensated for global warming? I think we know the answer.

That's one of the reason I can't take environmentalists seriously. They are so often completely shameless in their claims. They take no responsibility when they're wrong. Heck, they rarely acknowledge when they're wrong.  As a result, I'm not inclined to latch onto the latest faith-based chicken little mongering from them.  In the meantime, I'll try to live my life as I always have -- with as little impact on the environment as I can do without compromising my standard of living.  But I'll also oppose attempts by the irresponsible to cripple our economy and way of life.


Comments (Page 5)
on Feb 23, 2007

I'm sorry I must have missed it. Just when did they HAVE credibility?


They have hollywood celebrities behind them! How much more credibility do they need?




on Feb 24, 2007
They have hollywood celebrities behind them! How much more credibility do they need?


Foolish me and all this time I thought people who have studied the topic with great care like those scientist people had credabllity. I guess I was wrong beceuse Hollywood people are famous so they must know more.
on Feb 25, 2007
"Lets not find out 20-30 years from now that its true and irreversable and we should have done something about it 20-30 years ago."

Well, I can't see how you expect to find out any sooner, with the level of technology of simulation we have currently, and our ability to measure conditions universally on the planet, as well as the sun, along with our lack of knowing what is beyond the next hill sort of knowledge about how the solar systems natural self-regulation works.

But sure, we should drop everything and just abandon our economy, vehicles, and head for the hills, and eat each other. Well maybe that's not quiet what you are saying, but the GEICO caveman is looking at you like you are a few years short of developed.

"By the time of Moses you could walk across the Sahara in a little more than a week."

Scientific way of measuring it? Would you be walking in a straight line? How would u know, without a compass a gps device? What if you were walking through the shallowest part, the widest? History does not accurately record specific things.

"They have hollywood celebrities behind them! How much more credibility do they need?"

Yeah, the greatest actor in the world, Alec Baldwin, woe is us all.

"Foolish me and all this time I thought people who have studied the topic with great care like those scientist people had credabllity. I guess I was wrong beceuse Hollywood people are famous so they must know more."

Signed Party Pooper, cant get a joke.
on Mar 23, 2007
A week ago, you could count me as one of those faith-based chicken littles fully believing that mankind was causing global warming. It was so engrained into my mind, and all these scientists were confirming it, that I just assumed to be true. Then I saw The Great Global Warming Swindle (google video it if you like), and even though I was quite reluctant into seeing it, I can honestly say that my opinion flipped. They put forth some very impressive arguments on the other side of the debate.

For one, graphs show that there is a correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature, but it's actually increasing temperature that releases additional carbon dioxide. Another thing worth pointing out is that carbon dioxide makes up such a tiny percentage of our atmosphere (around 0.04%) that it is unlikely to have that major of an effect on warming especially since water vapor is also a green house gas and it appears in much higher concentrations. But I definitely encourage anyone to watch it, because it's certainly changed my mind about the whole issue.
on Mar 24, 2007
They put forth some very impressive arguments on the other side of the debate.


I slept through the last 15 minutes of it because it was not as thrilling as Mr. Gore's production but most of the information given I knew already. These arguments have been made since the 1960's and ignored by the nut jobs of the world. Glad to see you leave the DAEK SIDE. lol I was so interested in the subject that I researched it and wrote a book. I never published it but the conclusion is if we want to have a human race we need to find a new place to live. This argument has been laughed at since I suggested it in 1975. No matter what we do for or to this planet the sun will die in 4 billion years and the Sun has been getting hotter over the last 3 billion years and at the rate of expansion we have about 15k years before we start losing a lot of life on this planet and 100K years before the oceans start to boil. Time is Short.
on Mar 24, 2007
I slept through the last 15 minutes of it because it was not as thrilling as Mr. Gore's production


I prefer documentaries over Goebel type propaganda films.
on Mar 24, 2007
I prefer documentaries over Goebel type propaganda films.


How closed minded of you! LOL Next you will believe the Earth is round or that water is wet.