CO2 is NOT a Pollutant; Seeing is Believing

Watch this amazing time lapse video that shows the growth of two identical plants over 42 days. One is grown at normal atmospheric CO2 levels, the other is grown in a dramatically elevated level of CO2. The results are remarkable.

The plant grown in the high levels of CO2 grows faster, bigger and healthier than the plant grown in normal levels of CO2.

I have been writing for years that CO2 is not a pollutant. Plants use CO2 to produce food and oxygen that is required for all animal and human life on earth.

Warmer temperatures and higher levels of CO2 are beneficial to plants, animals and human society. Plants and potential farmland increase and more land becomes hospitable to human, plant and animal life when Earths climate becomes warmer and CO2 increases. On the other hand, lower temperatures and lower levels of co2 limit the plant and animal life that the Earth can sustain by humans and livestock.

Here is a link to an article that I wrote nearly 2 years ago entitled: "The Global Warming Myth Revisited": http://garyganu.blogspot.com/2008/07/global-warming-myth-revisited.html

Is The Global Warming Hoax Too Big To Fail?

Al Gore has millions invested in global warming carbon credit schemes. General electric is counting on huge federal subsidies to make their massive wind turbine business prosper. Top universities and professors are counting on huge grants and federal funding for their climate research projects. The United Nations IPCC (Intergovernmental Program on Climate Change) is working on a scheme to redistribute 100 trillion dollars from wealthy productive nations to poor, corrupt and nonproductive nations under the guise of the global warming hoax. Madison Avenue advertising firms have successfully incorporated climate change into many of their top advertising campaigns. The federal Government has placed polar bears in a new category of "threatened species" despite the fact that they are currently thriving, because their habitat is expected to "melt" in 50 years due to global warming. The president and the democratic party have spent massive political capital on pushing their "Cap and Trade" bill which will tax carbon producers to the tune of 50 trillion dollars over the next 50 years.

The global warming hoax has woven itself into our government, our economy, our universities, our public schools and into the the United nations. Trillions of dollars are being risked on the global warming hoax, which is the biggest hoax in the history of the planet.

Although it is clear that the Earth is not in peril, CO2 is not a pollutant and polar bears have a bright future ahead,, can we allow this hoax to fail? The very survival of corporations, countries and educational systems depend on the survival of the global warming hoax.

IMHO, massive funding and publicity will be put into a concerted effort to suppress the truth and promote the lie about global warming. This hoax will not be unravelled without a fight. It is too big to fail. Too many careers, politicians, companies, schools and nations are depending on it. If you thought that you have seen massive propaganda about the global warming hoax in the past ten years, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Is The Earth On The Brink Of An Ice Age?

On the global warming front, I read an interesting article today from Pravda, of all places. Of course I do not place much credibility in that state run publication of Russia. But in recent years, our own NY Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe, LA Times, Miami Sun Sentinel, the San Francisco Chronicle and most other newspapers across our country have been promoting a liberal democratic party agenda, rather than objectively reporting the news. The clearest examples of this is the coverage that they have been giving to AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming), the Obama campaign, Governor Palin, George Bush, the Iraq war and the economic downturn. I would put the credibility of Pravda on the same level as the aforementioned publications. But I digress.

This Pravda article made a compelling case for an upcoming global cooling cycle. Some of their ideas are very similar to the ideas that I wrote about on my blog, before I ever read about them anywhere else. When I read an article that comes to the same conclusions that I have arrived at by using reason, common sense and my personal experience, I know that I am on to something.

Here is an excerpt from my article entitled: "The Global Warming Myth Revisited":

Another thing that I discovered is that co2 is also dissolved in the oceans just like in soda pop. When the ocean temperature rises, co2 is released from the ocean into the atmosphere. This may explain why the records show that global temperature rise, always precedes the increase in co2 in the atmosphere. Articles that I have recently read reiterate these conclusions that I have come to on my own using reason, logic and common sense.

Here is an excerpt from Pravda's article entitled: "Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age"

The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

If we do not even know if the climate is warming or cooling, how can we know what action is necessary to safeguard healthy living conditions for all of humanity?

It is a fact that colder temperatures would be far more harmful to humanity than warmer temperatures. Colder temperatures would result in less land that is suitable for farming, less land suitable for habitation, more deaths due to freezing temperatures and increased disease due to more frequent winter conditions.

Let's suppose that CO2 emissions are actually causing the Earth's climate to warm. This would have a positive effect on life on earth, if we were entering an "ice age".

Also, humanity's reliance on fossil fuels has enabled the world population to grow to over 6 billion. This population explosion was made possible because of the advances that a reliance on fossil fuels has brought about. These advances include: mechanized farming techniques, refrigeration, air, ground and sea transportation of food and other vital goods, home heating and air conditioning, the availability of speedy emergency services, the availability of modern medicine, the availability of fresh drinking water, the availability of water for irrigation, the availability of indoor plumbing, etc.

If we dramatically reduced or eliminated the use of fossil fuels before finding a suitable, safe and environmentally safer substitute, we would reduce the worlds limit to sustain human life, and billions would die unnecessarily.

This is why we should not rush into any global solutions "half-cocked". There may be unforeseen negative consequences.

The Global Warming Myth Revisited

I believe that a concerted effort is being made to deceive the American public on the issue of man-made global warming. I am not saying that a conspiracy exists between Al Gore, the teachers union, the university professors, the mainstream media, the politicians, the Hollywood elite, and many private corporations. What I am saying is that all of these groups have their own reasons to further the deception of man-made global warming. Most people have a propensity for blaming human activity on the current global climate cycles and like to feel that they are part of the solution, rather than part of the problem. We all like to think of ourselves as the good-guys, and by getting on the man-made global warming bandwagon, we can prove that we are good people because we care about the planet. Some see an opportunity to make money or gain power and popularity. What could be a more worthy and noble cause? To doubt them or debate them on the science is often taken as a personal insult, as if you were calling their character into question.

I can simply prove my point by using Al Gore's words. On the subject of man made global warming Al Gore said: "the science is settled, the debate is over." He also said "global warming is the number one moral issue of our time." The debate is over as far as Al Gore is concerned because he does not wish to participate in debate. When he is asked about specific opposing studies, he attacks the character of the group making the studies and calls the source of their funding into question. Recently Al Gore said people who do not believe that global warming is real and caused by man-made Co2 emissions, are a tiny minority, and can be compared with those who still think the Earth is flat or that the moon landing was staged. In effect he stifles all opposing views. In fact, there is a petition signed by 31,000 scientists, who say that the debate is not over and are trying to make their views heard. Click here to read more about this petition.

Al Gore is just one man. Where the greater deception lies is that the news media, the government, the public schools, the universities and the arts all perpetuate this myth. Many business also take advantage. Such as motels that have placards in the rooms that say “Save the planet”, and then instruct you how to save energy by requesting that your towels and bedding not be changed daily. Polls show that the number one reason why people buy the hybrid Toyota Prius, is not to reduce global warming, it's not to save gas. The number one reason for Prius ownership is to make a statement that shows I care about the planet. Up until recently when fuel prices skyrocketed, the high cost of buying a hybrid automobile did not justify the fuel savings. People bought Priuses as a status symbol to prove that they were willing to spend extra money to help fight global warming. This whole man made global warming myth is the perfect ruse for altruists. What better moral cause that saving the planet with all it's inhabitants. This ruse is sure to bring much self esteem, self worth to millions of unsuspecting altruists.

To me it is clear that the science is not settled. This is a scam, a deception and/or a manipulation, not a moral issue. The global warming myth is being perpetuated like a well run publicity campaign, based on emotion rather than reason. I am constantly seeing images of drowning polar bears on melting arctic ice. The truth is that out of the dozen populations of polar bears worldwide, only two populations are declining in number. The rest are either stable or increasing in size. The worldwide polar bear population stands at 25,000 which is up from a meager population of 5,000 in the early 1970's. The media is also showing images of melting ice in the arctic. What they are failing to mention is that the icepack in the antarctic is at record high levels. The truth is that our climate is a dynamic system that is constantly changing.

Few people remember the "great American dust-bowl" of the 1930s. The highest temperatures on record occurred during the 30s. The massive heatwave and drought lasted a decade and rendered most of the farmland in 5 mid-west states unusable. There were storms of huge black dust clouds, made up of dried up soil, that blew hundreds of miles and turned the sky black in the heat of a cloudless day. This ten year heatwave and drought caused over a million people to migrate to other parts of the country in order to survive and find work. All of this was on the heals of the great depression. This climate disaster exacerbated the economic slowdown as food prices skyrocketed. This all happened during the 1930's, before the bulk of so-called greenhouse gasses entered our atmosphere. This climate catastrophe of the 30's was never attributed to man-made global warming, however, in today's political climate, each and every weather anomaly is blamed on man-made global warming.

I've read dozens of articles on both sides of the global warming debate (a debate that doesn't exist according to Al Gore). Click here to link to a page that directs you to dozens of scientific articles that question the status quo of global warming.

I will now relate a few of my own common sense observations which are irrefutable in my opinion. I may be wrong, but it is certainly worth discussion and study. To say the science is settled is an outright lie. The arguments that I make are mostly based on reason, experience and common sense. For example, plants need co2 in order to survive and produce oxygen and food. Higher co2 levels and higher temperatures would result in more plants and more food and more oxygen. Thus co2 is good for humanity, it is not a pollutant. Another point I make is that the global climate has always been in flux, it has always been changing, long before man inhabited this planet. Ice ages and warm periods have always come and gone throughout geological history. The Earth's climate has never been fixed. Another point that I make is that co2 is merely a trace gas at 380 PPM in the atmosphere. Water vapor is much more abundant in the atmosphere and has a much larger effect as a greenhouse gas. Water vapor also "self regulates" the earths temperature because when the temperature gets hotter, more water evaporates, and this produces more clouds which reflects the sun and cools the Earth. So in effect water vapor is a greenhouse gas unless it is in the form of clouds, then it reflects the sun and has a cooling effect. Another thing that I discovered is that co2 is also dissolved in the oceans just like in soda pop. When the ocean temperature rises, co2 is released from the ocean into the atmosphere. This may explain why the records show that global temperature rise, always precedes the increase in co2 in the atmosphere. Articles that I have recently read reiterate these conclusions that I have come to on my own using reason, logic and common sense. Not to mention the fact that Al Gore keeps insisting that the science is proved and the debate is over and that this is the number one moral issue of our time.

If global warming is such a serious threat that everyone knows is true, why do many Hollywood celebrities and wealthy people live on oceanfront property or near the ocean. According to Al Gore's documentary, sea levels are expected to rise and coastal flooding is imminent. In a time of falling real estate prices nationwide, why is expensive oceanfront property increasing in value?

All I am trying to say in this modest article is that the debate is not over, but it is being suppressed. What if Gore is wrong and we are actually entering a period of global cooling. Man's intervention, in an attempt to stave off global warming, could exacerbate the problem if global cooling was happening. During the 1970's a consensus of scientists published articles that stated global cooling was happening, and we were on the verge of the next ice-age. Global cooling would be much more harmful to life than global warming. Global cooling would reduce plant life which would lead to famines worldwide, not to mention decreased livable land mass.

Environmentalists give us meager humans too much credit. Human activity is insignificant when compared with the awesome powers of mother nature. The Earth's climate changes in natural cycles due to solar activity, magnetic fields, changing planetary orbits, volcanic activity, collisions with objects from space and other causes beyond human control and understanding. The Earth's climate has been in a constant state of flux for billions of years and there is little to indicate that these cycles are influenced by human activity. Scientists have also determined that global warming is currently also occurring on Mars, the moons of Jupiter and Pluto. Surely humans have no influence in these remote places.

All I am asking is: Why are school children and university students being taught that man-made global warming is a fact when this is just a theory? This is only one of the many areas where today's youth are being deceived and manipulated into believing things that are politically correct, but have not been proven to be true.

On a lighter note, click on the video below to hear a parity of John Lennon's song "Imagine(there's no global warming)".

Floods, Tornadoes and Sandbags

Recently, I have been in the Northwest US and the temperatures have been very unseasonably cold. I remember several snow storms in the plains of South Dakota as late as the second week of May. When I was traveling through the mountains of Wyoming during the first week of June, I got caught in a blizzard and had to turn around because the road was closed due to snow and Ice. I was in the countryside of Oregon during the second week of June and the temperature was in the 40s and 50s. During this period of unseasonably cold weather in the northwest, I heard of a heat wave in NY and in the eastern US. During this period of cold in the northwest and heat in the east-coast, there were many tornadoes and floods in the mid-west. I can only assume that the extreme weather in the Midwest was caused by the cold air from the west meeting the warm air from the east.

The news media reported that 20% of Iowa's corn crop will be wiped out this year. Also, when I was in South Dakota, they were urging farmers to delay planting their corn due to very wet weather. I guess the result will be even higher food prices later in the year. I haven't heard any news reports blaming this unusual weather and related disasters to global warming yet, but I am sure they will soon follow.

Reports say that this was the biggest flood on the Cedar River in Iowa's history. However, the greatest weather related disaster in the U.S. occurred in the 30s, when the Midwest was turned into "the great dust-bowl". A ten year drought, coupled with poor farming techniques, caused massive black clouds of dust to blow as far as the east coast, striping soil from 5 Midwestern states and making them un-farmable due to the dessert like conditions. Over a million people were displaced in that weather related disaster which lasted a decade in the aftermath of the great depression.

Anyhow, I got sidetracked, the main point that I wanted to make is about sandbagging. Today I saw a news-clip of Barack Obama helping fill sand bags in an effort to stave off the flood waters in Cedar Falls, Iowa. The question that comes to mind is: Do sandbags actually hold back flood waters? Sand is not waterproof. The bags are not waterproof. When you pile up the bags to make a damn, the damn cannot possibly be watertight. There are spaces between the bags and the bags are permeable to water.

Today I heard on the news that over 15 million sandbags were filled and placed in Iowa in an effort to save property. The news showed the flood-waters in residential neighborhoods that was waist deep and covered hundreds of blocks. I would like to know if any property was saved by sandbags. I did not see a lone house or business that was in the middle of the flooded area that was kept dry because of sandbags. No matter how good of a job they could do surrounding a house with sandbags, the water would surely leak in over the course of the hours and days, until the flood waters recede. Maybe, just maybe there was one house on the outskirts of Cedar Rapids, at the periphery of the flood waters, where the rising water had touched a sandbag just as the flood waters crested and the flood-waters began to recede. But I have not even seen that kind of an image on TV. Out of the 15 million sandbags filled and deployed, I have not heard of 1 success story where sandbagging saved a property.

The next question that comes to mind is: Why do people organize and fill and place sandbags during every flood, even though sandbagging has never saved a property? The TV news likes to show people working hard in the process of sandbagging, but I have never seen them show a positive result from the sandbagging. Quite to the contrary, they show people in rowboats navigating the streets, but you never see a dry area protected by sandbags. Maybe they do it for the same reason as Barack Obama did during his photo-op today. Maybe they want to demonstrate how hard they are willing to work and how much they care. Maybe, they can't sit idly by and watch their homes and community get flooded, so sand-bagging is used as an occupational therapy that keeps their minds and body occupied, rather than dwelling on the coming devastation. If they feel that they are doing everything possible to save their property, they wont feel so bad if it is lost to the flood. It doesn't matter if sandbagging has never been an effective method of saving property from being overcome by floodwater. The effort is noble regardless of the inevitable result.

Come to think of it, sandbagging is like many well intentioned liberal ideas. It looks and sounds like a good idea, but it doesn't work in practice. The idea is never condemned as a failure, because the intentions were so noble. This type of thinking can be compared to giving single moms welfare, day-care, job-training, food stamps and many other givaway programs. That is a very noble cause, but it has unintended consequences. By giving single moms welfare, we are rewarding bad behavior and encouraging dead-beat dads, un-wed mothers and subsistence living which is dependent on government. Records show that when more welfare is given out, higher numbers of people require welfare. But to liberals, the results are unimportant, the liberals feel good because they are giving money (not their own) to needy people. The un-intended consequences are irrelevant. It doesn't have to work to be considered a noble idea.

Or, maybe sandbagging is designed to make people feel good about themselves because they are working hard in an effort to help the community. Even though the idea of sandbagging has never helped any community anywhere to my knowledge. This reason is similar to people who "walk" for a cause, in order to raise money. Lets say they are having an "AIDS WALK" to raise money for AIDS research. The participants must get sponsors to pledge a certain amount of money for each mile that they walk in this event. For example, a student might have her boss pledge ten dollars for each mile she walks. If the walk was 5 miles long, the boss will be asked for a 50 dollar donation. When the girl walks the 5 miles she feels good about herself because her physical effort has raised money for AIDS research.

For argument sake, let us say that the girl got sick on the day of the AIDS walk and wasn't able to participate. Would her boss refuse to donate the 50 dollars that he pledged because she didn't keep her part of the bargain and walk? I doubt it. The walking has nothing to do with the charitable donations. In reality, they actually raised the money before the walk even took place, because that is when they recruited their sponsors and secured their pledges. The collection of the pledged donations is not dependant on the actual walk itself, but on the good hearts of the sponsors. Usually the sponsors actually donate more than they had pledged. But the walk makes the walker feel better about herself because she exerted physical effort for her cause.

Thank you for reading my disjointed comments that came to mind because of the recent disasters caused by the weather.

The Positive Effects of Global Warming

I found a very interesting article on the positive effects of global warming. Higher temperatures and higher CO2 levels, promote increased plant growth. Plants produce food and oxygen. Increased levels of food and oxygen, benefit humans and animals. I found it very interesting because I had written the same thing, months ago on my blog. I had not read this anywhere before, but I said that my explanation was derived from common sense, now there seems to be data to back up my common sense. Read this short article from the "News Busters" web-site and let me know what you think. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/06/09/could-global-warming-obsessed-media-ever-consider-co2s-benefits

You hippy-crites! When it comes to saving the planet do celebrities practise what they preach?

We are just men. We can not control the weather or the climate, for better or worse. We must adapt to it, as life has adapted to the changing climate on Earth for hundreds of millions of years.

If you feel that sea-level will rise and flood coastal areas, then you must move to higher ground. Just the opposite is happening, people are moving in droves to coastal areas.

If you feel that the earth is warming, then you must move north to cooler regions. Just the opposite is happening, people are pouring in to the Sun belt.

The most desirable and expensive real estate is on the beach and in the sun-belt. Hollywood is only a few miles from the Pacific ocean. Many celebrities live on beach front properties
Why are so many people saying one thing but doing the exact opposite?

People are doing this because there is no noticeable climate change. When the climate does change, as it has been doing since the creation of the Earth, man will be forced to adapt or perish. The dinosaurs and 95% of all species perished 65 million years ago due to sudden climate change when earth was forced into a dark global winter that was triggered by an asteroid colliding with earth. The planet warms due to sunspot activity. The forces that heat and cool the earth are huge and beyond human control. The best we can do, is adapt when change occurs. Change will inevitably occur as it has done throughout Earths history, long before man walked the Earth.

You hippy-crites! When it comes to saving the planet do celebrities practise what they preach?By TOM SYKESLast updated at 22:33 06 May 2008 (click here for link to article)

The Problem with America & Questionnaire

The problem with America is not an economic one, it is a spiritual one. Popular culture celebrates things that are bad, wrong evil and abnormal. They sport satanic symbols, they dress like gangsters and prostitutes, they have disdain for police and military and rich(successful) people and corporations. They mock Christianity and God. They embrace homosexuality, blended families and single moms. They make excuses justifying felons, drug addicts, and homeless bums, illegal aliens and terrorists. The foul language and foul music that is popular among today's youth illustrates their inner attitudes.

Our nation was built on family values and spiritual principles, that are being removed from today's culture in wholesale fashion. Our nation is becoming a house of cards without a foundation. Our economy is propped up by debts that we can-not repay. Hard work, saving and sacrifice, selflessness and humility are not valued by to days popular culture. Instead, popularity, showing off, instant gratification, thrill seeking, and sexuality and happiness have become our new values. I see no way that this next generation can find the courage, strength, selflessness and righteousness to sustain the American way of life and the wealth and liberties we have become accustomed to. Freedom requires restraint. Today, most restraints are considered intolerant, racist, homophobic, sexist, xenophobic or just plain mean.

The following ideas are being made popular in today's public schools, universities, media, and the arts (music, films, TV, etc).

Which of the following statements do you agree with?

1) Man-made global warming due to CO2 emissions is a proven fact.
2) All war is wrong.
3) The U.S. is an imperialist nation.
4) All foreigners should be allowed to immigrate to the US and become citizens.
5) Racism is a big problem in the U.S.
6) Brutality and racism is a big problem in US police, court and prison systems.
7) Believing in religion is an unreasonable belief.
8) Darwin's theory is more reasonable than creation.
9) The US military is often charged with murderous cruel and evil missions.
10) Homosexuality is normal and healthy.
11) Sex outside of marriage is normal and healthy.
12) All types of families are equal(single moms, homosexual, blended families, etc.) in that they all lead to equally healthy development, education and success of children coming from these families equally. Thus equally leading to a better future for America.

More on the Global Warming Deception

I can simply prove my point by using Al Gore's words. On the subject of man made global warming Al Gore said: "the science is settled, the debate is over." He also said "global warming is the number one moral issue of our time." The debate is over as far as Al Gore is concerned because he does not wish to participate in debate. When he is asked about specific opposing studies, he attacks the character of the group making the studies and calls the source of their funding into question. Recently Al Gore said people who do not believe that global warming is real and caused by Co2 emissions, are a tiny minority, and can be compared with those who still think the earth is flat or that the moon landing was staged. In effect he stifles all opposing views.
Al Gore is just one man. Where the greater deception lies is that the news media, the government, the public schools, the universities and the arts all perpetuate this myth. Many business also take advantage. Such as motels that have placards in the rooms that say “Save the planet”, and then instruct you how to save energy by requesting that your towels and bedding not be changed daily. Polls show that the number one reason why people buy the hybrid Toyota Prius, is not to reduce global warming, it's not to save gas. The number one reason for Prius ownership is to make a statement that shows I care about the planet. This whole man made global warming myth is the perfect ruse for altruists. What better moral cause that saving the planet with all it's inhabitants. This ruse is sure to bring much sense of value, self worth and and adoration to millions of unsuspecting altruists.

To me it is clear that the science is not settled. This is a scam and not a moral issue. I've read dozens of articles on both sides of this debate (a debate that doesn't exist according to Al Gore). Click here to link to a page that directs you to dozens of scientific articles that question the status quo of global warming. I will now relate a few of my own common sense observations which are irrefutable in my opinion. I may be wrong, but it is certainly worth discussion and study. To say the science is settled is an outright lie. The arguments that I make are mostly based on reason, experience and common sense. For example, plants need co2 in order to survive and produce oxygen and food.Higher co2 levels and higher temperatures would result in more plants and more food and more oxygen. Thus co2 is good for humanity, it is not a pollutant. Another point I make is that the global climate has always been in flux, it has always been changing, long before man inhabited this planet. Ice ages and warm periods have always come and gone throughout geological history. The Earth's climate has never been fixed. Another point that I make is that co2 is merely a trace gas at 380 PPM in the atmosphere. Water vapor is much more abundant in the atmosphere and has a much larger effect as a greenhouse gas. Water vapor also "self regulates" the earths temperature because when the temperature gets hotter, more water evaporates, and this produces more clouds which reflects the sun and cools the Earth. So in effect water vapor is a greenhouse gas unless it is in the form of clouds, then it reflects the sun and has a cooling effect. Another thing that I discovered is that co2 is also dissolved in the oceans just like in soda pop. When the ocean temperature rises, co2 is released from the ocean into the atmosphere. This explains why the records show that global temperature rise always precedes the increase in co2 in the atmosphere.Articles that I have recently read reiterate these conclusions that I have come to on my own using reason, logic and common sense. Not to mention the fact that Al Gore keeps insisting that the science is proved and the debate is over and that this is the number one moral issue of our time.

If global warming is such a serious threat that everyone knows is true, why do many Hollywood celebrities and wealthy people live on oceanfront property or near the ocean. According to Al Gore's documentary, sea levels are expected to rise and coastal flooding is imminent. In a time of falling real estate prices nationwide, why is expensive oceanfront property increasing in value?

All I am trying to say in this modest article is that the debate is not over, but it is being suppressed. What if Gore is wrong and we are actually entering a period of global cooling. Man's intervention, in an attempt to stave off global warming, could exacerbate the problem if global cooling was happening. During the 1970's a consensus of scientists published articles that stated global cooling was happening, and we were on the verge of the next ice-age. Global cooling would be much more harmful to life than global warming. Global cooling would reduce plant life which would lead to famines worldwide, not to mention decreased livable land mass. All I am asking is why are school children and university students being taught that man-made global warming is a fact when this is just a theory? This is only one of the many areas where today's youth are being deceived and manipulated.

The Most Terrifying Global Warming Video That You Will Ever See

Click on the embedded video or link below for an example of how the public is being frightened into buying the global warming hoax.

It's called "The Most Terrifying Video You'll ever See".



This is an example of how teachers and professors are using emotion, rather than reason, to get people to believe in political, economic and social change, due to global warming. This professor makes the case that the "facts" don't matter. He says that because the consequences would be so severe if global warming were true, that we must act now even if global warming turns out to be untrue.

1) It is so easy to rebuke this teacher's theory. First of, if we act now, there will be other costs besides the economic costs that, the teacher claims to be the only cost of acting. It is already happening. Because we are diverting much of our corn crops to be used in ethanol production, the price of food has gone up substantially, and famines are already happening in parts of the world because of it. For the first time ever, the US is importing wheat because much land that was used to grow wheat, is now being used for corn crops.

2) The main reason why the planet can support more people than it ever has before is because of the machinery that the industrial revolution has brought us. These machines include farm equipment and transportation equipment and refrigeration equipment and water supplies and plumbing and medical equipment and construction equipment that build the safest, most "weatherproof" homes that the world has ever seen. All of this runs on fossil fuel. By substantially reducing the use of fossil fuel, it is inevitable that millions would die around the world.

3) Do we know what the solution is? If we can't be sure that the problem of global warming exists; How can we be so sure that an extremely costly solution would be effective? Perhaps the solution would be completely ineffective, or even worse; what if our "solution" inadvertently throws the planet's climate into a devastating "Ice Age"? It would be much harder for us to adapt to global cooling than global warming. Much more plants and animals would surely die as a result of global cooling. A warmer climate and more CO2 in the atmosphere, promotes more plant life, which means more food will be available on the planet. The planets climate has always been in flux since the formation of the earth. Life has always adapted to that change.

4) Even if we could be sure of an effective solution; Is the government capable of implementing it? We are constantly hearing politicians, on both sides of the isle saying that "government is broken". They say this in regard to our ineffectual border security, the downturn in the economy, the social security and medicare system that is going bankrupt, the national debt that is spiraling out of control, crime, corruption, poverty, education, etc. If government can not solve these concrete problems, that have clear and practical solutions, why do people think that we can solve a vague and undefined problem like global warming?

5) The most powerful answer to that video is the spiritual one. The teacher says that the threat is so great that we must address it weather it is real or not. I would like to ask this teacher if he believes in God an the eternal soul? If he answers no, I would like to know why not, after all, the possibility of spending the rest of eternity suffering in hell, sure out-ways the cost of not preparing ourselves for the afterlife. According to his beliefs, he should be instructing his students to repent, to ask God for forgiveness and try to live a righteous and spiritually correct life. After all, the consequences of going to hell are so great, that even if we don't believe in hell, it would be prudent to do all that we can to avoid that possibility, because the consequences would be so devastating. The consequences would be far worse than global warming. So, if this teacher truly believes his theory, he should immediately spend all of his time preaching, rather than teaching. He should be in favor of school prayer and school bible study, just in-case. After all, we only spend less than a hundred years on earth and the rest of eternity many depend on our actions here.