I would ask that everyone to take the time to watch this BBC documentary on Global Warming/Climate Change. If, after viewing it, you aren't completely convinced that the panic the science world - not all, but in general - and the media have created over this issue isn't completely un-founded, that you'll at least acknowledge - despite what Al Gore tells us - that the debate is not over on this subject. That before we ruin not only the U.S., but the entire world's economy - which you'll see is actually the goal of many of these so-called (socialists) environmentalists - that we think long and hard about this issue and consider both sides of the story - and yes, there are two sides to this story. Unfortunately, we've only been hearing the one side.
The film addresses how this has become a "religion" of sorts for the true believers and how any scientist who dares dispute the theory is treated as a heretic and an apostate and is likened to a holocaust denier. It talks about how this has become an actual "industry" where tens of thousands, if not millions of people are making a whole lot of money off of this issue and that in order to keep the funding coming they need to keep making ever-more cataclysmic predictions.
It demolishes the claim that CO2 is causing GW, when in reality, according to these scientists, it's the exact opposite. That GW actually creates CO2, not vice-versa. According to these scientists that's the inconvenient truth the former next President's film An Inconvenient Truth "conveniently" omits.
It discusses how the ones that will be hit and hurt hardest if the global warming zealots get their way are those in the developing countries in the third world. How asking them to develop their societies on alternative energy sources is to basically tell them they can't have electricity and to be content living in squalor.
Watch it and if after watching it you're not at least skeptical about man-made global warming then you don't want to be convinced.
This is the real "inconvenient truth".
2007-03-12
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Six: I advise caution in blaming money motive to those who advocate cataclysmic human-caused global warming. Remember, those people assign the same motive to the global warming skeptics. I would reserve such information as a counter-punch to charges that global warming skepticism = pay off from big oil.
It seems to me that many environmental concerns end up hurting poor people. Restrictions on developing land in places like CA contribute to the high cost of housing in SF and LA.
I tend to think that our generation of humans will not be the first ever to destroy the globe. I believe that a serious, factual, open-minded look at the development of civilization shows that over the years the world gets along just fine, and that human activity fluctuates between causing problems and then correcting them. If you think that NYC is disgusting today (I do not!), please consider it in 1800, with all the mud and livestock, and absence of running water and sewage. And consider Rome of today and various intervals of thousands of years ago.
Post a Comment