Is Global Warming Really That Big Of A Problem?
Posted by Catherine Morgan on January 19, 2007
IS GLOBAL WARMING REALLY THAT BIG OF A PROBLEM? — by Catherine Morgan
Is anyone concerned that, the year 2006 has gone on record as being the warmest year in United States history in the past 112 years? That’s a lot of years. Or, that when experts look at the global temperatures they find that each year since 1993 the temperatures have been in the top 20 of the warmest years on record?
All the experts are saying that we need to start fighting global warming now. So, why aren’t we? I have a theory. Aside from all the economical and political problems that would arise in taking real steps to combat this problem, and that list is long…..The real stumbling block is the name. Our ears just don’t hear words like “warming” any more, “warming” actually sounds kind of “soothing” doesn’t it? Please don’t get me wrong, I am not making light of the gravity of this problem. But the sad truth is that we are now living in what I would call; “the age of extreme”, and most importantly “the age of fear”. Every minute, every day we are being bombarded with; “BREAKING NEWS”, “TERRORISTS THREAT WARNINGS”, “DEADLY PANDEMICS”, you know what I mean. We are surrounded by so much grief, doom, and sadness that are ears have become immune. So, “global warming“ might as just as well be called “a boo-boo in the atmosphere“.
In all fairness, it’s not our fault. For most of us this immunity has become our survival mechanism. Let’s face it, you can’t really watch the news these days and actually allow yourself to be affected by it. If you did, you would be in a constant state of panic and despair.
The government uses this immunity to their benefit. They would like us to continue to not worry about the whole global warming thing. It’s better for them if we keep thinking it’s just a little boo-boo, and we don’t have to worry about it right now. That’s because, if they admit the problem, they will need to fix it….and by fixing it they will be throwing a real monkey wrench into our governments’ political comfort zone.
Everyone knows that the only real solution to the global warming problem is to decrease carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. We can only reduce these emissions if our government makes this problem a priority. I think….As long as we are only suffering from “global warming“, our government will continue to treat this problem as a “boo-boo“. Once this “boo-boo” turns into a “gaping, hemorrhaging, war on our planet“, and of course the Bush administration is no longer in office, we might actually see a real effort to combat this devastating and very serious problem. Until then, we might want to consider renaming “global warming” to something a little less innocuous .
Let me know what you think.
——————————————————————————
Also see: THE CONVENIENT $MEAR — posted 2/28/07
AND FOR LOTS OF LINKS AND INFORMATION — SEE MY MOST RECENT POST ON THIS SUBJECT, BY USING THIS LINK.
For more infomation go to: http://www.stopglobalwarming.org
ALSO SEE: Jan. 23rd post also on global warming
And check out: Tamino’s Site and My Errant Mind also:
—————————————————————————————-
Let us know what you think on some of the other issues in politics today…..just go the the WHAT DO YOU THINK? link.
—————————————————————————————-
icanplainlysee said
Hi again..
I wonder if you noticed when researching the warmest years on record that the temperature change being spoke of was less than 1 degree, and that varied up and down depending on which scale was used.
Also, i dont think its accurate to say that “Everyone knows that the only real solution to the global warming problem is to decrease carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.” The UN recently disclosed that gases from cow manure releases 18% of the earths carbon monoxide, much more than all motor vehicles combined.
Your point about media hype is exactly right…just as any topic including the end of the world sells. In 1976, Lowel Ponte published an enormous best seller “The cooling: Has the new ice age already begun?”
Scientists considered covering the poles with coal dust to aid melting, thus avoiding, for a few more years, the icing of the planet.
There are those that would postulate an end of the world scenario to further other agendas and these dire predictions have been around forever.
Global warming(your right, that’s a passive name for sure)is occuring, but only in a very minor way, nothing like the catastrophic doom Al Gore so disingenously put forth.
I submit this for your perusal and judgement.
Thanks for your post.
Catherine Morgan said
Thanks for your comment “Icanplainlysee”.
I knew when I put “Everyone knows”, I was going to get myself in trouble. I guess I was just taking a little creative liberty since it really is an opinion piece. I’m obviously not an expert on any of these topics, I just have an opinion….and now a blog too.
Thanks again for your comment and for keeping it “nice”.
tamino said
“Icanplainlysee” is mistaken.
The recent UN report does not assign 18% of greenhouse gas emissions to “cow manure.” It is assigned to animal husbandry. One of the biggest impacts of animal husbandry is the energy cost, especially of pumping water for cattle. The other big impact of animal husbandry is deforestation; a significant fraction of the arable land in the world has been cleared to make grazing land for the animals we eat.
As for “cow manure,” and cows in general, their contribution to the atmospheric CO2 budget is zero. That’s because the carbon in animal tissue, and in CO2 from animal respiration (and manure) comes from eating plants, and plants got that CO2 from the atmosphere in the first place. So they don’t “produce” CO2, they just cycle it.
Cow manure (and cow farts too) do, however, contain methane, which is 24 times as strong a greenhouse gas as CO2, on a per-molecule basis. So when plants take carbon from atmospheric CO2, and animals release it back as methane, it does increase the total greenhouse effect.
As for the “mere” 1 degree rise in temperature, the global average temperature change during a deglaciation (from full-on ice age to interglacial) is about 5 deg.C. That generally takes at least 5000 years, so the rate is around 0.1 deg.C/century, and this is known to be a stress on ecosystems. The current rate of warming is 1.8 deg.C/century; if sustained over the next century (as is likely), it’ll be a tremendous strain on ecosystems (including us).
I get the impression “Icanplainlysee” is not really very well informed on the issue. I suggest you get your climate science from climate scientists.
icanplainlysee said
So, cows contribute heavily to greenhouse gases. Thanks for the confirmation. Now, how much more do these creatures contribute to this than say, all combustion engines worldwide? It seems the irrational allegiance to man’s contribution to the warming of the atmosphere has reached hyperbolic levels and explains your fantastic claim of nearly a 2 degree warming, a 2000% increase.
Challenge yourself to find a link to your information, please.
Leading people to believe they are causing the increase in temperature averages or that “living green” changes anything is shameful and simply untruthful.
Now, if the idea is to cripple commerce, economic growth, capitalism in general and American capitalism in particular, then maybe your onto
something.
Catherine Morgan said
I have to respectfully disagree “Icanplainlysee”.
Chucky said
I think that both methane and CO2 are important forcings on the climate and both have an impact. The concentration of both gasses has increased dramatically in the past few hundred years with respect to what they were before the industrial revolution (see for example here.
In answer to how much methane contributes to global warming as compared to CO2, see here. While the increased methane is having an effect and cannot be ignored, CO2 also having a large effect. The graph shows the different forcings (complete with error bars to give you an idea of the uncertaintly in each). So cows (and other sources of methane) do not contribute as much to global warming as CO2.
I have made global warming the debate of the week on a little website which I’m starting. So if anyone would like to vote about it, or contribute to the argument for either side of Is global warming manmade? then please do!
Catherine Morgan said
Hi Chucky….thanks for all the great information and links….I’ll check them out.
pirano said
Was just discussing this –the name ‘global warming’ that is– the other day. In purely practical terms, most people aren’t too bothered by current meteorological conditions that are causing temperatures to reach into the 70s in December and January, so yeah, perhaps another name is in order…
With all due respect to icanplainlysee, and others in the US who deny/ignore that human activity has a clear impact on climate change, his point above, is telling:
“Now, if the idea is to cripple commerce, economic growth, capitalism in general and American capitalism in particular, then maybe your onto something.”
Most climate scientists, indeed most true scientists and researchers in any field, don’t have any such agenda as icanplainlysee suggests. To suggest that is simply intellectually dishonest and sidesteps the true debate by injecting your own agenda into it.
As for his cow argument, well, that one was debunked 20 years ago when Ronald Reagan brought it up.
I’m still somewhat baffled by the fact that this debate largely exists solely in the US. While much obviously needs to be done, it’s become more or less accepted here in the EU and other parts of the world, and governments are beginning to act, albeit quite slowly. Until we all find/elect politicians who are willing to tell people that they simply have to consume less, drive less, fly less, etc, progress will remain very slow.
Cheers!
tamino said
I’m dismayed, but not baffled. There is a tremendously powerful and well-funded campaign to spread misinformation about the issue. Some of the denialist propaganda is very well crafted and can be powerfully persuasive; some of it is downright infantile. We also suffer from leadership which is strongly favorable to the oil industry.
But the tide is turning. News stories are emerging that here in the U.S., evangelists are joining forces with scientists to insist on better stewardship of the planet. And public opinion has swung toward the need for action (thanks largely to Al Gore), which of course makes politicians change their tune in an attempt to avoid extinction.
Despite the progress in the U.S., Europe is clearly leading the way. Tony Blair has been vocal about it for years, and the Stern report on the economics of global warming has had a tremendous impact. Norway has, in at least one evaluation, been ranked #1 in the world in its response to global warming. Thanks to all you folks on the other side of “the pond.” Our children deserve better than to suffer the consequences of our excesses, and they definitely deserve honest answers about what to expect in the future.
Catherine Morgan said
Thanks “tamino” and “pirano”….I agree with you both 100%.
And thank you both so much for your comments.
inel said
Climate Challenge is, I think, a good alternative name. That’s how we refer to what needs to be done about Global Warming aka Climate Change in the UK. At least it is not fatalistic, nor is it alarmist, but the term encourages people to think positively about what can be done to combat the problem facing us all.
In response to pirano’s and tamino’s great comments above, I have my own opinion as to why this debate exists primarily (but not solely) in the U.S., which helps me understand why the misinformation campaign is so successful in America but doesn’t fly in Europe …
pirano said
Tamino –
“I’m dismayed, but not baffled. There is a tremendously powerful and well-funded campaign to spread misinformation about the issue.”
No disagreement there; I spent most of my life in the US and learned how debate is framed, but that’s a whole ‘nother topic now, isn’t it.
I suppose that what I meant by “baffled” was that it’s nonetheless just taking so damn long. As far as I know, the idea of Climate Change has been talked out for nearly 40 years… Anyway, I noticed immediately after moving across the pond what a stark difference there is in coverage of the issue in the mainstream press generally in Europe with how it is reported in the mainstream US press. Almost of the day and night variety.
Inel — “Climate Challenge” isn’t bad. But that almost sounds like a sport, no?
The real challenge, as it’s been for some time now, is to get people to dramatically change their lifestyles — and then the market forces will follow. You see that with the rising demand in hybrid cars (and hopefully, a decreasing demand in absurd SUVs, suped-up monster pick-ups and urban assault vehicles). And to maybe figure out a way to explain how Climate Change is already, NOW, impacting our lives. Dire predictions about the future simply don’t resonnate as clearly. EU leaders keep talking about the predicted dire consequences, but at the same encourage the rapid expansion of airports, for example, with the number of passengers expected to triple by 2050. I don’t see how we can have it both ways, not at this rate of ‘progress’. It’s somewhat off-topic, but there’s a great book, “The Debt Boomerang: How Third World Debt Harms Us All”, which shows directly how debt in the south impacts us in the north. Climate Change was just one example of many.
Cheers!
Catherine Morgan said
Hi “pirano”………I couldn’t agree with your more. And thank you very much for your comments.
inel said
Hi Pirano,
Day and night climate change coverage certainly is: I was astonished (delighted!) at the difference in the public’s perception of climate change upon my return to the UK last year, even though I would regularly read British news online while in the US. The UK public seem to be many years ahead of CA on climate change awareness, though at the same time way behind on recycling (!), and the rest of America probably lags CA on both topics. Many here express disappointment, as you do, that it has taken this long (several decades) for governments to listen to scientists and finally take much bolder steps to address climate change. The good news is that America will jump fast once its voters finally decide to act to combat climate change. I am optimistic.
You are right that any future threat does not impact our lives the same way as a present struggle. Also, global issues do not impact our lives the same way as local problems. And, climate change has a greater impact on the poor than the rich.
So, apart from continuously beating the drum, and collectively welcoming and supporting every new committed participant in the climate change battle, I agree that we need to question our own actions and those of our governments whenever decisions are made that are contrary to an overall strategy of improving the health of our local and global environment (as in your airport remark).
We need a concrete way of explaining the present impact of climate change without blaming every extreme storm on it, but nevertheless showing we now have more extreme weather conditions more often in more places on Earth. A Google Maps project on this topic would be cool. I have not found one yet, so I may have to start one myself …
I wish there was one place (website, authority, organisation, …) that would reflect a simplified visual of not just “how we are doing”, but “how much more we need to do to achieve success” in addressing global warming. Even a crisp description of what we mean by success in this “sport” would go some way to helping focus our aim
Finally, I would find beneficial some sense (beyond carbon calculators) that our actions, no matter how small, are capable of having an impact, are indeed having an impact, and are not being negated by others. (I mean, when I sort all my recyclables carefully for years, being used to the system in CA, then one day hear that the local recycling depot in England throws them all in one big container marked “LANDFILL” that kind of thing does not make me feel happy at all.)
Literary Bohemian said
“Everyone knows that the only real solution to the global warming problem is to decrease carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. We can only reduce these emissions if our government makes this problem a priority.”
Don’t disempower yourself or your readers by making this the governments responsibility. The responsibility rests with each and every human being. Stop driving your car, buy local and organic products, stop eating meat.
I think its high time we stop relying on our leaders to make the big decisions and instead, make the decisions ourselves.
Dave On Fire said
@Literary Bohemian:
Absolutely right. Nevertheless, there are some human beings who will be reluctant to act, and it is the role of government to compell them to do so. Corporations in particular are pushed into polluting by the laws of capitalism, and only strong government action can overcome this.
In saying this I do not disempower anyone. Nobody lives in a vacuum, and while it is important for individuals to change their own behaviour, it is also important that they influence their leaders to do the right thing.
@Catherine, re the expression “Global Warming”
It’s an interesting point, one I hadn’t really considered. But the more alarmist name for the phenomenom that gets used in Britain, “Catastrophic Climate Change” is wildly ridiculed, even by leading environmentalists.
The thing is, exaggerated alarmist views breed panic and defeatism, at a time when we all need to co-ordinate and pull together. It’s also easy to contradict. The expression “Global Warming” is simple, neutral and, most crucially of all, accurate and descriptive.
@
?
In my own latest blog entry I have analysed some of the most frequent excuses for denial and inaction over climate change, why not come and read
Catherine Morgan said
Hi Dave…..thanks for you comment. I know what you’re saying about the “name thing”…..I’m not really suggesting we change the name….it’s kind of just my “food-for-thought” way to get people to talk more about the issue. Maybe I went a bit too far with it….but people are responding….and that was my intent.
Thanks again so much for your comment. I’m just getting started so all the positive feedback I can get the better…keep me motivated. I’ll have to go and check out your site….sounds great.
Dave On Fire said
I agree totally, anything that promotes dialogue can only be a good thing, especially when it’s an aspect of the topic that mny may not have considered.
jestering said
Yeah maybe, but meanwile no science man has still demonstrated that there is human responsibility in that so-called Global warming
Literary Bohemian said
Dave: I find this statement of yours ironic. “Corporations in particular are pushed into polluting by the laws of capitalism, and only strong government action can overcome this.”
You speak as if the United States Itself isn’t a corporation. But indeed it is, and its ruling body must, in every descision regarding business, first consult the World Trade Organization (of which we are signatories and participants.)
If youre interested, I can point you in the direction of some information that might help regarding the Corporate Personhood of America Inc.
In my opinion, the people we call “leaders” are just as flawed as any other human being. Therefore, all that we can really do to help ease Global Warming (that can we can be absolutely sure of) Is to ease global warming ourselves. Capitalism and Government has done such a good job of teaching us how to think in a way that implies we need their services, don’t you think? But thats an entirely different debate.
Chris in Canada said
I’m old enough to have seen first hand these doom and gloom stories through the years and the only difference in all of them is that they get more sophisticated each new round. This one is no exception. I challenge you and your readers to Google Global warming hoax or global warming fiasco and spend a couple of hours expanding your minds. I was a believer too until the pro-warming voices got shriller each passing month. That really started to raise red flags for me and I’m glad it did, I’m much more informed now.
Nothing mankind has done has raised the mean temperature any measurable amount, and nothing we do now will make one iota of difference. Read up my friends and you can see who is behind this and how we all will suffer here in the first world for absolutely no gain. In a decades time when nothing has happened maybe some of you will think back to reading this or similar posts and realize how badly we have been had. I’m not a scientist or climatologist and am certainly not what you would call a conspiracy theorist, but I do have a lot of what really matters…an open mind and common sense.
Catherine Morgan said
Hi “Chris In Canada” — Thanks so much for your comments, I am happy to post all comments, even the ones that do not agree with my opinion. I would just like to “respectfully” disagree with the notion that simply because you can “google” something that it makes it true.
I MADE MY RESPONSE TO THIS COMMENT MY POST FOR JAN. 24…PLEASE GO TO
http://informedvoters.wordpress.com/2007/01/24/are-the-oil-gas-lobbies-at-the-route-of-the-global-warming-mis-information-campaign/
tamino said
Re: Chris in Canada
I’m a natural-born skeptic. I’m also a scientist. So I was mildly interested in, and skeptical of, global warming for a long time.
A few years ago I heard of a paper on the subject of global warming published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal by two Harvard astronomers, one of whom was a “colleague of a colleague.” This piqued my interest, so I read the paper. This further piqued my interest; to make a long story short, I’ve spent the last few years studying the scientific literature in depth on this issue. Global warming is real. It’s dangerous. It’s caused by human activity.
I can also tell you that I too am “old enough to have seen first hand these doom and gloom stories,” and this one really is different. Past doom-and-gloom warnings of scientific topics came from a single, or a handful, of scientific research teams, with the mainstream urging caution (but caution rarely gets reported in the press!), and their false alarms fizzled out quickly as new scientific evidence emerged. The global warming warnings come from the vast majority of climate scientists, in fact the concensus is frighteningly close to unanimity. Furthermore, since the alarm was first raised nearly 20 years ago, a vast array of new evidence has emerged, and rather than defusing concern, it has made the scientific case so strong that only those in denial fail to see that the danger is so real, we would be fools to ignore it.
Urging readers to seek out more detailed information is sound advice. But urging them to seek only websites found by searching for “global warming hoax” or “global warming fiasco” will turn up mostly the warped misinformation, often crafted with extreme cleverness, which literally floods the web, as denialist forces have taken to the internet to spread doubt.
I’m sure you’ve spent at least “a couple of hours expanding your mind.” I’ve spent years studying the scientific literature, and that’s after all the years I spent becoming and working as a scientist in the first place, to acquire the background knowledge necessary to appreciate some of the subtleties involved. Perhaps you’ll understand that a couple of hours perusing websites run by denialists is a pathetic reason to doubt, when faced with the combined efforts of thousands of scientists over decades.
To all readers: spend more than just a couple of hours researching the science, and don’t get your information from what turns up in a google search for “global warming hoax.” Those who create most such sites are either abominably naive, or outright liars.
Catherine Morgan said
“Tamino” — Thank you so much for your comment. I can only consider myself “somewhat” knowledgable on the subject of global warming. I have no scientific background at all….just a desire to inform others and hopefully facilitate change. So having you…a scientist yourself, “back-me-up” on the Global Warming issue is very appreciated. So again. Thank You.
I recommend to anyone who wants to educate themselves on the Global Warming issue to go to Tamino’s site for a lot of great information on this and other subjects. http://tamino.wordpress.com/
Dave On Fire said
@Literary Bohemian:
The behaviour of the U.S. does often have more in common with what we expect from corporations than from nation states. However, governments and corporations have very different responsibilities.
A corporation’s first duty is to it’s share holders. It must strive to make a profit at all costs or it has derelicted that duty and, in many countries, broken the law.
A government’s first duty is to the country it runs and by extension, in the case of a democracy, to the people of that country.
The are closely involved. A government can pass laws (e.g. a tax on greenhouse emissions) that make certain kinds of corporate behaviour (e.g atmospheric pollution). Conversely, a corporation can influence government behaviour through lobbying, advertising, bribery, blackmail, nepotism and negotiation. I believe that the extent of this kind of influence is what you referred to when you called the U.S a corporation.
But all that that proves is that government action isn’t overcoming corporate pollution in the U.S., because the government is in the corporations’ pockets. It in no way proves that government action can’t overcome corporate pollution. If the government passes and enforces laws that make pollution less profitable, corporations will respond by polluting less. The difficulty lies in making the government pass and enforce this legislation.
Did I ever say our leaders in government and business were flawless? Rather the opposite, I would argue that their thirst for power constitutes a very substantial flaw. But that in no way implies that “all that we can do to ease Global Warming … is to ease global warming [in our own behaviour]“. That is what you meant, right? I would say that the “flawed” behaviour of those in positions of power gives concerned citizens the duty to take that power back – not to ignore it and hope it will go away.
@all:
Tamino has hit the nail on the head.
Chris in Canada said
Catherine, thanks for allowing my opinion even though it goes counter to this blog. On the subject of believing everything you Google, one can also say don’t believe everything the media is feeding you. Sensationalism sells, just ask the National Enquirer. Of course if you enter Global Warming Hoax you’ll get an “anti” opinion as Tamino says, but to leave out the hoax part just gets you to MSM propagation sites IMHO. I have no doubt that you are sincere and passionate with your views Tamino, but I’ve read and seen graphs put out by the pro side that cherry pick what they want you to see to bolster their opinion, such as the “hockey stick” by Mann that completely ignores the warming period in the Middle Ages. Most of the better sites I refer to give lots of names (Scientists and Climatologists) and back up their claims with many links. To drag oil company funding into it actually makes the accusers look bad because it’s those who are toeing the line and spreading the climate change “gospel” who are reaping the big rewards in the form of my tax dollars that are vastly larger in amount than what Exxon ever gave the anti’s.
This doesn’t pass the smell test at all with me. Comment’s such as the one just made by Dr. Heidi (can’t remember her last name) from The Weather Channel about any certified Climatologist who says anything going against the climate change grain should lose their certification is just so over the top it boggles the mind of any sane person.
I would like to propose that if iron-clad guarantee’s can’t be given in say ten years from now that humankind is definitely responsible for global warming in a significant way, that all the signatories of the coming U.N. document on global warming should be given large fines and the ringleaders possibly jailed for inciting uneccesary panic and costing the ecomonmy and taxpayers big time. Notice I said global warming, not climate change. Climate changes all the time so we don’t want to give them an out when it starts cooling again in it’s natural cycle. They’re so certain it’s going to keep getting warmer thereby melting the ice caps on Greenland and Antarctica and causing the Oceans to rise measurably, then let them put their money and reputations on the line.
It’s one thing for the great minds of Science and Climate to say this is possible, it could happen but we just don’t know. It’s another thing to say with certainty that it IS happening and we are SURE it’s directly because of human intervention.
Catherine Morgan said
Hi “Chris in Canada” You are welcome…..That is what this site is all about. I of course have my opinion, and of course I will post it. However, my intention is for this site to be a “forum” for all opinion….just as long as it isn’t “mean-spirited”. As long as the comments are respectfully written….they will ALL be posted. Regardless of whether they are in agreement of me or not.
My main concern with “politics” these days is how polarized it has become. People don’t seem to have “respectful” debate anymore. Bashing each-others opinion seems to be the norm….and where does that really get us??? I’m hoping that maybe in some small way, this site will help heal some of the wounds of hatred, that seems to be spreading on some of the other political forums out there.
Another words……THIS IS AN “ATTACK-FREE” ZONE. And all are welcome.
But, that said…I have to “respectfully” disagree with your opinion. And thank “tamino” for following up with you on all of the scientific research. I know that I’m learning a lot more about global warming simply because you have a differing opinion to mine, and by you posting it, and “tamino” responding to it….I’m finding all his information quite helpful in “supporting” my original opinion.
So…thank you.
Chris in Canada said
Looks like we’re both pretty stubborn…lol.
I was just reading the other day that there was a movie/documentary just starting to be filmed that is supposed to blow some of Al Gore’s “facts” out of the water. I haven’t seen Inconvenient Truth but don’t really see a need to since my minds made up already. I will however see this rebuttal when it comes out. I’ll bet it’s existence won’t even be mentioned by most media outlets as I’m almost sure the owners of them won’t allow too much air time to something that is going counter to most people’s beliefs.
Another thing, why do we never hear of the many benefits of warming? I live in Eastern Ontario and this winter was fantastic up until this lastest cold snap! I have a picture I took on the 7th of Jan. outside with no snow on the ground. No warming the truck before going to work, less wood to burn to heat the house, so my CO2 output was much less than it normally would have been. That never seems to make the news though as a plus. I would certainly love a longer growing season as well. I wonder if anyone is doing a cursory study to see how much CO2 was saved in North America this Fall and Winter? I’ll bet it was a phenomenal amount!
Dave On Fire said
Are you saying that global warming isn’t happening, or that global warming is happening and is good?
You seem to be saying both, yet the two statements are clearly incompatible.
Catherine Morgan said
Hi “dave”
Basically, it’s a play on words….to get attention to the subject. My position is that global warming is very real. And, why aren’t we taking it more seriously? On Jan. 24th I wrote another post on global warming that explains my position on the subject in a more serious manner, as well as gives links to other informative information…
http://informedvoters.wordpress.com/2007/01/24/are-the-oil-gas-lobbies-at-the-route-of-the-global-warming-mis-information-campaign/
But for some reason the more controversial wording of this earlier post seems to get more attention, and that is why I put it out again.
Anyway, thanks for the comment, and feel free to post your feeling on global warming as well.
Dave On Fire said
Catherine, my question was actually addressed to “Chris in Canada”, who has consistently intimated that global warming is a hoax, but then comes out with this gem:
Which completely goes against his previously stated position.
However I can see why it might not have been obvious and will try to be clearer in future.
Catherine Morgan said
No problem…..I’m just glad to have you post your comments.
Brent said
Has global warming caused all of the snow in California and all of the winter storms in the Midwest?
112 years is not that long at all, considering that the Earth is a billion years old. Did man cause the Ice Age’s glaciers to melt? I’m not saying that there is no such thing as climate change. All I am saying is that man does not have the power to control nature and the climate. Just because a bunch of wacko scientists say this (because they need grant money) does not make it true. It still remains only a theory.
Truth does not rely upon the number of those who believe it. It relies only upon facts.
orshouldi said
I wouldn’t consider your argument to be the main reason why people are dissuaded from believing in the authenticity of global warming, but it certainly has some validity. There is an expectation of scientific theories sounding, you know, “scientific”.
Chris in Canada said
Dave On Fire, I believe the climate is warming currently. Climate is changing all the time, up and down, as it has for millenia long before man was here and will continue on it’s merry way uninterrupted by our presence here. I was just kind of joking about emitting less CO2 with the warm weather we had been having.
Here’s a link. The guy has credentials rivalling anything on the Pro side:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html
Brent said
Link cited. Thanks. I’ve added it to my del.icio.us.
jeremiasx said
The reason people don’t take global warming seriously is that those with the MONEY are making a concentrated effort to put out their own debunk theories by highly PAID scientists.
It’s the same reason people believe in Santa Claus (yes, they obviously do, because he’s all over our post-Halloween culture every year). It makes a lot of money for someone. (Guess who?)
I’m much more likely to believe in those who fight for principle rather than those who mindlessly fight for profit. It’s just a tendency I have to distrust profiteers.
Theory: If you run your car in a closed garage and sit in it with the windows down, you’ll pass out and die in a relatively short time. The earth maintains it’s own atmosphere within several layers. Nothing escapes. Now run billions of cars for billions of hours and sit in yours with the window rolled down. I know it’s a simplistic way of looking at things, but hey, why not?
Brent said
Simplistic at best.
Did it ever occur to you that these principled scientists have their own agendas? Could it possibly be grant money?
How many scientists do you personally know? I happen to have a good friend who is a scientist and works for the USDA. He thinks that man-made global warming is absolute nonsense. And he is far from highly paid. So whom should I believe? My friend or some wacko?
Make no mistake about it. These global warming nuts are environmentalist wackos with agendas. And they also happen to be hardcore liberals. That alone gives me good reason not to trust them.
Go ahead and drive your dork mobile. I will drive my kick-butt car, and watch you eat my dust.
orshouldi said
I don’t know how good an argument that is, Brent. Certainly, there are many scientists fighting to get grant money, and some are very calculating about it. But doesn’t that go without saying? Some of our most well-known and famous scientists were also shrewd businessmen, some with what you could call flexible ethics. Think about Francis Crick and James Watson.
I’d also agree that many scientists, just like politicians, corporations and lobbyists, certainly do have their own agendas, whether it’s trying to press their point or just wanting money to work. However, labels such as “environmentalist wackos” and “hardcore liberals” seem to have little factual basis.
Finally, regarding your friend that works with the USDA, it would help if you elaborated on what that actually entails. Don’t get me wrong, I do think I get your connection; agriculture, scientist, government employee, all that jazz. But that could mean anything between being an authority on the subject to studying PH levels in soil. I wouldn’t count on someone’s opinion based strictly on your given details.
Brent said
Do you happen to know any scientists? If not, then why would you trust someone whom you have never met? It’s all based upon theory. Is that good enough for you to dismiss any debate? It used to be a theory that the Earth was flat and that the Sun and the Moon revolved around it.
Let’s not rush to judgement based upon science that changes two or three times per decade, until we know the FACTS. Now I’m saying that we should just go and pollute the environment. I am saying that we should stop feeling so guilty for something that will happen and has happened for millions of years without our intervention –climate change.
How are you so sure that the Earth is not supposed to be warmer than it has been for the last 112 years, and we’re finally getting back to the more normal climate? We’ve only had satellites for 50 years.
Brent said
Oops typo. My bad. Please disregard my typing mistake.
I meant to say:
Now I’m not saying that we should just go and pollute the environment.
tamino said
It has come to this:
Seriously folks: is this the attitude we want for our scientific policy?
Catherine Morgan said
Hi “Tamino” — It just goes to show you how much of a “ME, ME, ME” society we have become. The only problem with that way of thinking is that…….most likely the people that will suffer from our ignorance and neglect of this problem will be our kids and grand-kids. I wonder if they will share the sentiment of this writer?
Catherine Morgan said
Hi everyone…..you might want to check out this blog. Let me know what you think.
http://errantmind.wordpress.com/2006/12/30/global-warming-hits-backyard/
Sean Wilson said
Great post. As always, global warming brings up a lot of issues and heated debate. All opinions do have some validity. Even those who say there’s lots of natural emissions, such as from cows and volcanoes.
They’re missing the point.
Those things are natural. Our atmosphere has a certain tolerance level and can cycle so much pollutants out at a certain rate. When you add artificial pollutants to the mix, you push that limit. The longer and more precarious we hover at that limit, the more damage is done and the more risk we take.
It isn’t that the Earth can’t take some climatic change. It can. But it can, has, and will again do it in ways that aren’t a friendly 1 or two degrees.
There’s already evidence global warming is affecting ecosystems all over the world. Call it a natural process if you like. That’s fine. Desertification is a natural thing. However, when it’s caused by human activity and changing weather patterns because cities spring up, are paved over and create artificial upcurrents because they absorb and retain so much heat during the day, that that isn’t natural.
Catherine Morgan said
Thanks for your comment Sean, I agree.
neilwestbrook said
wow…lots of information about ‘global warming.’ i am definitely more informed…and thanks for the websites. i am not sure, however, that voting will make a difference.
Catherine Morgan said
“Neilwestbrook” — Thanks so much for your comment, I’m glad you found the information on this post informative. You are right, simply voting is not going to make a difference in the global warming crisis — although, I still hope you will vote.
Thanks again.
Brent said
I’m just looking forward to my tropical paradise in Illinois!
Why is everyone so cynical about such a great thing (were it actually true as described)?
Speaking of education, what caused the glaciers from the Ice Age to melt? Just a simple question that can simply be answered by a fifth grade kid with common sense. So much for debate!
Catherine Morgan said
Hi “Brent” — Thanks for your comment. I’m just not so sure your “paradise” would be so wonderful with the influx of millions of displaced people from all over the rest of the country???
From your comment, I’m not real sure where you stand on the issue. Care to elaborate?
Are you a teacher? Have you studied global warming with your students? What would a fifth grader say on the subject?
Let me know. And thanks again for your comment.
Brent said
Are you kidding me? It’s called common sense, and how about you answer my question first?
Catherine Morgan said
Sorry “Brent”…..I hadn’t noticed that this wasn’t your first time commenting, so I didn’t realize your position. I didn’t mean to be insulting, just curious, as a mother I would be interested to know what teachers may be discussing with their students on this subject.
Brent said
Mmmkay. So, anyhow…About my question? I don’t teach fifth grade children. But I know some, and they have answered my simple question with a logical and reasonable answer. Can you?
Chris in Canada said
So now we’re playing the “children card”. Fair enough. It seems to me if we implement something along the lines of Kyoto it will create a lot more poverty in North America. Do you want even more children living well below the poverty line? This isn’t progress, it’s regression, and that isn’t good for any society. And all for “it could be”, “it might happen”.
2500 Scientists and Climatologists are signing the IPCC document. What about the 17,000 Scientists and Climatologists that signed the Oregon document doubting AGW? Does that number sound like the “lunatic fringe” to you? Yes, I know some of the signatories can be discounted but that still leaves a great number opposed to action that will achieve nothing positive.
Contrary to what is being widely reported in the MSM, there is no consensus that most Scientists agree with AGW! The few that are hand-picked by the UN might be in consensus, but when was the last time the UN actually did some good in the world? Where were they during the Rwandan genocide? What are they doing about Darfur? Oh right, they’re too busy chasing monsters (AGW) that don’t exist. Much safer than tackling real world problems. Flood the media with this non-existing problem for long enough and the public will jump on board and forget what the UN was really created for. Yes I’m a skeptic, and I have a good right to be. Everyone does.
Chris in Canada said
I said to my thirteen year old son the other day, “I hope you don’t believe all that crap they’re teaching you in school about global warming”, and he laughed and said “They can’t get the weather right a week from now, what makes them think they know what it will be like years from now?” Until that point we had not discussed global warming so he didn’t know what my views were on it until I gave away my position with the way I worded my question to him.
I’ll just make the assumption that most of his friends think the same way…good for them.
lucky_star said
All you hear about Global Warming is not crap! We need to take heed so that we may slow down climate change to some degree for our childrens sake and possibly their children. This however will not change the eventual outcome only delay the coming of a new age somewhat!
There are a few things going on with the earth that have happened before and will probably happen again. The climate shift (note that I called it that instead of ‘global warming’) has happened before; that is partly why there are fossilized remnants of tropical vegetation and animals in places that have been very cold climates for all of recorded history. The hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica (the big indicator of doom) has, by the way, begun to shrink.
Geological changes are also underway; the earth’s magnetic field is said to be rotating away from the current North and South Pole locations. Scientists believe that when the poles migrate, they will almost trade places, but not close enough for us not to notice.
The rotation of the earth, and the movement of the tectonic plates around the thicker-consistency molten rock close to the earth’s core, are adjudged to begin a cataclysmic weakening of the earth’s magnetic field. When that happens, the earth’s magnetic field will no longer effectively repel solar radiation as it does now.
Catherine Morgan said
Thanks “Luck_star”, for your well thought out comments. I hope we will hear from you more.
Later today I am going to consolidate a lot of the important information from this post and the other I have on global warming, to make a new post that will begin with all the links we have gathered here (both pro & con). To maybe make it easier for some readers just begining to take notice of the global warming problem.
So, I hope you will check back, and if you happen to have any good links on the subject let me know so I can include them in my next post.
Thanks again for your comment.
Catherine Morgan said
Hi everyone. If you haven’t already, please check out my latest post on Global Warming. I have organized a lot of important links and resources, to help anyone who wants to become more informed on the subject of global warming. I hope you will find it helpful.
http://informedvoters.wordpress.com/2007/01/28/is-global-warming-really-a-problem-part-ii-see-the-information-check-out-the-links-and-you-decide/
Brent said
Can you explain the record low temperatures across North America? How about freezing in Southern California and Florida, ruining citrus crops?
I’m sure that this freezing, record lows, and snow and ice storms across much of the country this winter was all caused by man-made global warming.
There is no doubt that in only a month or two we can expect all of this ice to melt, as the Dun’s deadly rays melt all of the ice and turn it into water. We wouldn’t want that, because that means that the greedy water bottling companies will make (gasp)a profit!
Yep, it’s all coming to an end as soon as this ice –made from man-made global warming melts. Actually, it won’t be long before our entire planet starts to spiral through the solar system first very close then really far away from the sun. At this point, it’s totally out of our control to manipulate nature. If only we had acted sooner, we could have caused the planet to not get do close to the sun, and saved millions of lives. The ice created by winter’s wrath will melt, then we are all doomed!
I don’t know about you, but I’m going to prepare myself for the Apocalypse!
clevelandcliff said
well you speak in such generalities that it is hard to respond to your comments..”all the experts” dont agree..you can find a scientist to disagree with everyone that agrees….and not “everyone” knows that reducing carbon dioxide will reduce the “global warming” ….the united states has had clean air acts (laws) since 1955..did you know that? and since 1970 has been reducing the amount of greenhouse gasses or air pollutant (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate, sulfur dioxide, organic compounds, and lead) it is only until recentely that carbon dioxide has been considered as a major contributor to to warming (alledged) sinse 1970 our emissions have been reduced by 53% all the while we have grown 42% and and use 48% more energy….these are facts from the epa…i can only reference my own personal experiences being 51 and growing up in the 60s and 70s to know that our air and water is so much more clean now than it was then….cars, plants, everthing that burned something was sending it directly into the atmosphere..we has fish dying in lakes and streams, acid rain fallout, sulfur smells and other horrible results from this….as my career followed into industrial sales, i experienced first hand the pollution and air problems from power plants, steel mills, refineries and such…from 1970 on our standards have been raised to the point that our air water resources are under control and we live to a very high standard…only a visit to say mexico city or mumbai india would confirm this….to read what is coming out of the main stream press is to believe that we the us are these energy consuming monsters that have no regard for others or for the envirnment or for mankind which is just not true..do just a little research and get a little facts from “the other side”
dgjs said
Hi,
I don’t think that only government should move and reduce CO2 emissions: each one of us can do something to help, we don’t have to sit and wait!
I came across this list of 50 things that quite everybody can do to slow down global warming, check it out, and maybe consider adding the link directly into this post body: http://globalwarming-facts.info/50-tips.html
Sean Wilson said
Catherine,
Not sure how I missed this great post, first of all. Secondly, I think you’re spot-on with your thinking that the name for the occurrence has made it less of an issue. It does indeed sound too nice, almost pleasant—like a dip in a hot tub.
inel said
Hi Catherine,
In response to the title of your post:
and in recognition of the fact that your blog here is called:
Here’s a clear, straightforward, and up-to-date appraisal from the President of the Royal Society that addresses the question this post poses and your blog’s implied purpose:
That is the full text of a Press Release issued by The Royal Society last Friday.
I hope your readers will find this quote worth reflecting upon.
Brent said
I’m convinced that global warming has been caused by man, and that we are in true danger. I think that the best thing we can do is to support environmentalism. The best way to do that is to buy carbon footprint offsets, in order to curb the warming of the planet. This and only this will save our planet, due to the problem that we have created through our greed for profits.
If you drive a car or heat your home, you are responsible.
Catherine Morgan said
Hi Everybody………Thanks for all the great comments.
Brent said
Hi, thanks for deleting mine. Glad to see that you are open minded babe. Censorship is awesome! Long live Stalin!
Catherine Morgan said
“Brent”…..I did NOT “delete” your comment. I don’t know what you are talking about. I do have this post, and similar ones in other spots on this site, as well as on two of my other sites. Maybe what you are talking about is just somewhere else. I have only “edited” two or three comments out of hundreds (due to bad language)…..but did not “delete” any.
You can refer to me as Catherine, not “babe”. Thank you.
Brent said
Hmm, well I commented earlier today. It’s mysteriously not there. What can I say?
What I was saying is that I think it is smart for people to purchase carbon footprint offsets, in order to rid themselves of the guilt associated with killing the planet. Everyone is responsible.
Given your photo, you look like a babe to me, Catherine. Is that something which you are ashamed of?
It’s a compliment. Usually when a man tells a woman that she is attractive, the woman says thank you. But you don’t have to. I will assume that you are one of those types, from now on.
Brent said
I have a feeling that my comments are showing up as false positives in your spam filter.
Catherine Morgan said
“Brent” — I’m not sure what you mean by that, I don’t really know anything about the spam filter. I do get hundreds of spam, and I just delete it.
Brent said
I just added another comment, with a link in it, and it’s not showing up. You should check your spam filter, to see if legitimate comments are showing up as spam. It happens all the time to me. You really should look at your spam before deleting it.
Catherine Morgan said
O.k. I’ll check.
Catherine Morgan said
“Brent” — I don’t have anything from you in either moderation or spam. I’ve been having a lot of problems using WordPress today, and I am having a lot of “freeze-ups” on my computer.
If you think it is a problem because you are sending links, I saw someone do something like this before:
informedvoter (dot)wordpress (dot) com —- or something like that?
I don’t know….if you just started noticing this problem today, you may just want to wait it out….I think there is some problem going on today.
But, one thing…..you can be assured, I am not “censoring” anything on this site…..the purpose of my site is to get all sides of the issues…..I have no problem at all with people disagreeing with me. What kind of world would it be if we didn’t all have a mind of our own? I just don’t like disrespectful language, and will edit if I think it needs to be.
Brent said
It’s cool.
Catherine Morgan said
Brent. I went through my spam and found two comments from you. I marked them not spam. I’m not sure if they were posted though?
johnkad said
What really drives me mad is that after all the wasteful excess of the consumer society in western democracies, some of the worst hit victims of global warming are the developing countries which have no high tax revenues to deal with natural disasters. Is there no justice in this world? After decades of abject poverty they now have to contend with the worst effects of global warming. Then you have some conservative people who believe that it shouldn’t matter if people in developing countries are dying as long as they (the middle class) can continue to obtain cheap food and waste natural resources.