By David Schussler

Global warming fears are being whipped to a new frenzy that is distracting us from real and imminent dangers from terrorist threats. Watch out for the political bait and switch that is about to occur in the political arena.

World wide headlines are now touting an end of the world scenario perpetrated and promoted by “a consensus of the scientific community”. A just concluded Paris meeting of scientists from 113 countries concluded Feb.1st, to opine that “there can be no question that the increase in greenhouse gases are dominated by human activities,” according to a top U.S. government scientist, Susan Solomon. Without challenge, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued warnings that global warming was “very likely” caused by human activity. This according to an MSNBC reporter on Friday translated to a more than 90 percent certain conclusion that it is caused by man’s burning of fossil fuels making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.

The IPCC results were co-authored by Dr. Kenneth Denman, eminent senior research scientist and author or co-author of many climactic change publications since the 1980’s. Dr. Denman is funded by the fear he perpetuates not through his research as much as through his computer modeling of possible scenarios. How much humans have contributed to the global warming cause has never been fully determined, and is difficult to impossible to measure. About the report, Dr. Kenman states, “We’re hoping that it will convince people, you know, that climate change is real.”

Everyone knows that climate change is real. An outspoken speaker at yesterday’s televised reporting of the commission’s findings stated that the public just has to believe what this group of science experts is saying and since they are the experts, the public just has to accept their verdict and allow their government officials to administrate new changes for all of society. He was inferring that most of the American public are too ignorant to understand the science and/or make decisions affecting their own destiny.

There is no debate over whether human life affects our climate and atmosphere. There is still much debate, however over whether human changes affect planetary changes for the good or bad. Anything that we do to pollute our air, land, or water is not good. History and geological studies, however prove that our earth has gone through radical changes without the help of us. Whether or not these changes were good or bad is nebulous, or at the very least, subjective. Global warming, ice ages, extinction of entire species of inhabitants have all occurred without our aid or interference and is significant to us only in determining where we are at now and what the future may bring for our well being. Natural forces are far greater than human forces in determining our planet’s future and that is what all scientific studies show. Even with the superior technology incorporated into the newest computer models, the scientists involved tell us that there are too many synergistic variables not included that are constantly interplaying and whose results regarding heating and cooling of the earth and its atmosphere are at best a guess and at least debatable. A report contributor Dr. Kevin E. Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research Climate Analysis Section says regarding the El Nino aspect of global warming, “The underlying hypothesis is that El Niño exists and plays a role in the Pacific Ocean as a means of removing heat from the equatorial regions of the ocean, where it would otherwise build up. An implication of this, if correct, is that further heat buildup from increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would lead to increased magnitudes and/or frequency of El Niño events. Nevertheless, we do not expect this to be simple, and nature always seems to be able to come up with surprises as to just what the future holds.”EndThis is the key truth and statement that should be added on to every conclusion that every scientist makes regarding the hypothetical determinations of global warming. This is the statement that should be added on to the “scientific consensus.”

During yesterday’s press conference with representatives of the IPCC some reporters were already demanding carbon caps on industry and pressing the officials present, over and over, with alarm in their requests for immediate results regarding conclusions that haven’t even been made regarding the new IPCC report.

Dr. Fred S. Singer is an atmospheric physicist at George Mason University. He is also the founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, a think tank on climate and environmental issues. He points out to us that “…. The scenarios are alarmist, computer models reflect real gaps in climate knowledge, and future warming will be inconsequential or modest at most.” An opinion shared by many, many other scientists.

Dr. Singer points out that the IPCC reports are excellent but most people do not or can not read the 600 or so pages and few read the summary. This means that most of us rely on the reporting of the results from our major news outlets. You can be certain just from the questions that were asked at the news conference that the reporting we receive will be selectively biased by whoever delivers it.

At yesterday’s press meeting it was announced several times how many tens of billions of dollars President Bush has allocated over the past few years toward the research of global warming. Scientists who are skeptical about global warming are generally supported by non-governmental agencies. Why? Because if one was to write a proposal to a federal agency stating that they were going to do a proposal showing that global warming is not a real threat, they would not be likely to get funding. Climate science, in general, has become pathological and is clearly being guided by federal money. Even though much beneficial research is being gained, global warming results are necessary (as nebulous as they are) to attaining and continuing research financing. The alarmist misinterpretations promulgated by the fear mongering press demands it. There are many scientists now afraid to speak out for fear of losing grant money or permanence within their University’s walls.The health and well being of our nation and the peoples of the world are what is most important in life. What we do as citizens of the world individually and collectively impacts all of life and nature and we should always do our best as evolution continues.What we do as citizens of the world individually and collectively impacts all of life and nature and we should always do our best as evolution continues.We should not allow ourselves to be either led or mis-lead by fear down the wrong path but should choose for ourselves by education and common sense what is best for our families, friends, country, and world. We must not allow ourselves to be swept up in fear to institute changes to our society, industry, and economy that could hurt us in response to what possibly could happen in the next thousand years. We must also not allow ourselves to be distracted from the real threat facing our world today, “extinction of all non-Muslim infidels” by radical Islamic terrorists.What we do as citizens of the world individually and collectively impacts all of life and nature and we should always do our best as evolution continues.We should not allow ourselves to be either led or mis-lead by fear down the wrong path but should choose for ourselves by education and common sense what is best for our families, friends, country, and world. We must not allow ourselves to be swept up in fear to institute changes to our society, industry, and economy that could hurt us in response to what possibly could happen in the next thousand years.So, watch out for the “Bait and Switch”. Do not allow the global climate changes to become the new focus of our government and finances and news. We must finish the battle to overcome terrorist activities attempting to take over the world or global warming will have no meaning to anyone.

Be Sociable, Share!