Is Global Warming Real?

The government says that the Earth is going through a process called Global Warming. I will argue that we are not going through Global Warming, but a natural cycle that the universe undergoes periodically. I also will suggest that if the earth is going to do anything, it is going to head in the opposite direction of Global Warming, which is known as an Ice Age. Most of my argument will be argued from a philosophic and scientific point of view, which means I will argue mostly by the idea that the earth is four billion years old. (I DO NOT SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT THE EARTH IS BILLIONS OF YEARS OLD THOUGH, BUT MOST IDEAS AND STATISTICS ARE BASED ON THAT THOUGHT. IT MAKES THE ARGUMENT A LITTLE MORE EFFECTIVE IF YOU CAN TAKE THE SCIENTIFIC “FACTS” AND STILL BE ABLE TO FLIP THEM ON THE SCIENTIST.)
Firstly, what is the philosophy behind this process called Global Warming? Scientists believe that global warming is the developmental plodding rise of the earth's surface temperature which is thought to be caused by the greenhouse effect and responsible for changes in global climate patterns. They believe that global warming has transpired in the earth’s history as the result of natural influences, but the expression is used most of the time to refer to the warming that is predicted to take place as a result of increased emissions of greenhouse gases.

How does the global warming process work? The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) says that the greenhouse gases are going into and thickening the earth’s atmosphere. When the sun’s rays enter through our atmosphere, they used to bounce off the earth. A certain amount would stay in our atmosphere and keep the temperature stable, and a certain amount would exit the atmosphere. Now, since the earth’s atmosphere is thicker than it used to be from all the greenhouse gases, it traps more radiation from the sun in our atmosphere, and in turn is causing the global climate to increase. The IPCC mainly uses a single graph to illustrate their point of view, which is called the MBH98— also known as the Hockey Stick Graph. This graph shows variations of the earth’s surface temperature for the past 1,000 years. It shows a steady climate and environment till about the year 1900, and then the graph goes literally up the wall. It shows that the temperature climbed about 9o C over the past hundred years, which is a big deal concerning global climate.

The philosophy of global warming is exceptionally comprehensible on what controls cycles of climate change. The first is recurring variations in the sun's energy output. The sun has been measured according to its brightness as to how hot it is and studies show that according to the sun’s brightness the temperature fluctuates appropriately. The second is the peculiarity in the earth's orbit. Third is the influence of plate tectonics on the spreading of continents and oceans. Lastly is the alleged "greenhouse effect," which is caused by atmospheric gases such as gaseous water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides, which help to confine radiant heat that might otherwise break out into space. This last “control of climate,” the “greenhouse effect,” actually is a fragment component in global climate change. Commonly understood, but infrequently revealed is the reality that 95% of this greenhouse effect is due exclusively to natural water vapor. So, of the outstanding 5%, only 0.2% to 0.3% of the greenhouse effect is due to emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases of human resources. If we are in a global warming crisis, even the most assertive and costly proposals for restraining industrialized carbon dioxide emissions would have an unnoticeable effect on the global climate.

The IPCC is disregarding the fact that pushing an exaggerated idea of global warming will get the political response they want. They are a political organization that was set up by the United Nations to provide evidence to support the framework of climate change, government has assigned it, and it is entirely political. Anything that does not go with this exaggerated political issue is tossed aside and disregarded. There have been reviewers for the IPCC reports that have been excommunicated from the organization because the IPCC did not like the fact that these men were giving an opposing argument. Where the government has placed their entire philosophies about global warming in the IPCC, the IPCC has placed all their philosophies solely in their computer models. If the IPCC wanted to place all the different possible components in their models it would be up to 5 million different variables. With that said, there is not a single computer in the world that can handle that kind of data, but more importantly handle all of the calculations of the interactions and complexities of the climate. These computers that they are using are incapable of properly handling the most important ingredient of all of this— water vapor. Therefore, I believe they are impractical to use and serve no logical purpose as a means of finding fact about our climate increase.

The IPCC’s main evidence of global warming is that the climate is changing and getting warmer. This seems like a compelling argument on the surface, but what if one digs past the obvious facts? The climate has always been changing and it always will change, regardless of what things humans are doing or not doing. Professor Tim Patterson, Department of Earth Science at Carleton University states, “The only constant about climate is change, it changes continually.” Past researchers have concluded that between 1400 and even as late as 1900 there were regions all over the world that where much colder than normal. These time periods was known as the “Little Ice Age,” and before that there were regions that were unusually warmer. This means that the twentieth century was not out of balance; it was normal when it is evaluated closely to the past.

Climate warming caused by synthetic greenhouse gases is typically presented as a depressing calamity that will provoke the worldwide extermination of animals and plants. It would induce plagues of infectious and parasitic diseases, famines, and floods—perhaps even attacks of mutated insects unaffected by insecticides. Melting glaciers are predicted to have heavily inhabited coastal areas and elevate the sea level by 3.67 meters, which would flood islands. There would be mass resettlement and a swarm of other social and environmental effects, which would be always detrimental and never beneficial. Dr. Stephen Schneider said:

"To capture the public imagination we have to make simplified dramatic statements, and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective and being honest."

One American Climatologist stated that the IPCC is trying the “scare them to death method” which seems to be working as far as bringing in the money to commit to these studies.

The warming of our earth is not an unusual thing. It is quite normal. This is a process that our earth not only goes through, but the entire solar system goes through it as well. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fails to put in their reports that the planet Mars, as are other planets, is heating up and showing significant signs of “global warming.” The IPCC never shows the entire philosophy of what is entirely behind global warming. Mars is not exposed to pollutants like Earth is, and yet the NASA researchers are finding that it appears that the planet is coming out of an ice age. NASA’s Odyssey orbiter has detected seasonal changes, which may as well be the reason for the planets’ melting of polar ice. It has also gathered calculations that are pointing to a long-term trend of the planets heating up and cooling down. The NASA Odyssey orbiter cannot be blamed for Mars’ exiting an ice age. Mars’ current climate conditions and the frozen water at low altitude regions suggest to us that something is out of equilibrium on Mars. I would suggest that Mars is coming out of an ice age and the temperature would be that not of the norms. They would be fluctuating and going in the opposite direction than is thought to be normal.

I believe that the philosophies of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports have become bibles for the bureaucrats and environmentalist fanatics. This causes these uncompromising people to accuse modern civilization of being responsible for global warming. They also constantly claim that they reflect a true "consensus" of the scientific community. That claim about the consensus is very debatable, being that there are scientists all over the world presenting in-depth arguments and criticizing a majority of the ideas the IPCC puts out for accessible information.

The summer time melts of the ice caps in Antarctica are far from being a portentous development that signals the ongoing slaughter of the earth through global warming. I believe that it is actually a sequential development, an occurrence that proceeds over an extended period of time. Cold fronts begin at the poles and head for mild zones. If the poles were warming that would mean the cold fronts would be not as cold, leading to unusually warm winters. It is similar to a refrigerator. If a refrigerator loses its power, it loses the ability to cool the things it was originally meant to cool. If the Artic ice mass was melting or even thinning we would be the recipients of much more mild fronts. What we are finding more of, and which the IPCC is leaving out of their reports, is that the ice packs are actually thickening. In turn the fronts that are being sent south are much more colder than in the past. If the polar ice caps are seeing their power to make the more mild regions cool slowly fading away, why is it that we are observing every year more record breaking cold spells? As for the very real scenario of immense snowfalls and brutal blizzards, it is important that we remember a very simple fact: the colder the air is in a front, the more vicious the storms are going to be that are created when the Arctic air meets the warm air that is being pushed up from the equatorial regions.

The warm fronts that are moving north are increasingly warmer, but that is not from global warming like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change so sternly presents. The increasingly warm air is from volcanic activity on the ocean floors. These volcanoes are becoming increasingly more active. There are witnesses on the surface that see the volcanoes spewing lava up through the ocean and into the air. These volcanoes are turning the sea floor into boiling caldrons. This heating of the oceans are sending gigantic amounts of carbon dioxide into the upper part of the atmosphere. There the CO2 becomes moisture and falls as rain in the summer, fall, and spring, and snow in the winter. Snow also falls in the Artic, laying down more layers on top of the ice that is already there, which in turn makes the ice thicker. The larger the quantities of CO2 that we have in the atmosphere, the greater the amounts of rainfall and snow we will be subject to. Carbon dioxide levels are now nearing 400 parts per million and growing. Over millions of years, every time the level of CO2 has escalated above 200 ppm, the earth has gone through an ice age. Robert W. Felix writes:

"Research shows that there was a sudden and dramatic rise in carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere at the dinosaur extinction of 65 million years ago. Today's rise in CO2 levels can be attributed to our warming oceans. After all, the oceans are known as a carbon dioxide 'sink,' especially when the water is cold. But as the water warms up, it releases CO2 into the atmosphere. This happens in much the same way that a warm bottle of home-brewed root beer will release CO2. And if you give that CO2 no way to escape, the bottle will explode. We've got it backwards. We've got cause and effect in reverse. The CO2 is not causing global warming. Instead, our warming oceans are releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. It's not global warming, it's ocean warming, and it's leading us into an ice age."

As recent as 30 years ago, talk wasn’t about global warming. It was about a forthcoming ice age. Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, in International Wildlife in July of 1975 said, “The facts have emerged, in recent years and months, from research into past ice ages. They imply that the threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.” As early as January 1994, Time magazine wrote:

"The ice age cometh? Last week's big chill was a reminder that the Earth's climate can change at any time. The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago; the next one, for there will be a next one, could start tens of thousands of years from now, tens of years, or it may have already started."

How is it we can go from one extreme to the other in such a short amount of time? Was an ice age a serious problem? Was it likely? Was it even possible? There have been up to twenty ice ages in just the previous two million years. Each of these ice ages lasted around 20,000 to 100,000 years. We do not know why there is such a discrepancy, but we do know that these cold periods were separated by warm periods that lasted anywhere between 10,000 to 15,000 years. One of the things we can be sure of is that we are in one of those warming periods. However, it seems we are already about 13,000 years into it.

My philosophy is that we are at the end of this period and we will be heading into a new one sooner than most people predict. At one time it was general knowledge that an ice age would come upon this earth, but slowly— so slowly that each generation would hardly notice any change from the last. Once one did realize that the earth was going into an ice age, there would be plenty of time to move industries, governments, and populations to a southern climate. However, recent studies show that ice ages come upon us with complete brusqueness and can only catch us by surprise. The last ice age that this planet experienced came within just a twenty-year period. There is physical evidence that shows that in the last ice age the British Isles went from a complete contemporary climate to absolutely freezing and completely covered with glaciers that where hundreds of feet thick. An ice age will happen again and at first we will not even recognize it, so the first few years we will feel we are just having another terrible winter season. But after those first introductory years of the ice age, rivers will begin to freeze through all the seasons of the year, the snow fall that we receive from year to year will not melt completely, glaciers will begin to form, and some of what is currently known as the world’s most fertile ground will become barren.

The global warming scare uses just about every propaganda device known to man. There are incessant petitions to scientific authority. The propagandists make up that there is scientific agreement that the human race and its actions are absolutely altering the climate in a hazardous way. This is an absolute lie. There can be found no highly regarded scientist who will say otherwise. The graphs are being carefully condensed so that the parts that are showing the earth cooling are removed from the graphs and those that are presenting the global warming are kept. The cooling data, such as the thickening of ice caps, snow in Saudi Arabia, and record low temperatures, are disregarded. Warming data, such as breaking ice shelves and record high temperatures, are presented in the headlines. This is not a managed conspiracy but a behavior in which selfishness, dogma, tree huggers, politicians, and journalists combine to help each other to get more financial support, more exciting stories, and more enemies to find fault with. The climate of our world is far too imperative for this kind of claptrap. What we need is more authentic scientific examinations of the earth climates. If we do make a decision on the "precautionary principle" of keeping CO2 levels steady, we can turn to those many technologies, which discharge little or no CO2. There is no reason the world’s economy can’t continue to flourish with lowered greenhouse emissions. There is a grave need to start being honest with ourselves, start presenting truth as it really is, and stop thriving on these half-truths that are appealing to the eyes, but detrimental to our entire world.

Grace and Peace