The 5th of June was World Environment Day. I could see the appreciable difference in awareness among people and also more focus on the issue at hand by the media. The media of course is just following the world scene, where there is a general urgency and seriousness to tackle the problem of global warming. The term "global warming" actually encompasses many different parts for the general public(me). It means you keeping your vehicle well serviced so that it spews less smoke, it also means using less electricity, it also means using paper instead of plastic etc etc. Now I know not many of this makes sense in the true meaning of global warming, but this what I understand it to be and probably what most people would think of it too. In effect I have just been doing enough to be a good citizen in the global resource pool called Earth. But apparently global warming is all about CO2 (Carbon dioxide).
I saw the documentary "An Inconvenient truth" a couple of months ago. It was a very passionate, dramatic and a bit of self propaganda presentation by Al Gore. It was quite a scary eye opener for me to see how our modernization was killing earth. On the back of this documentary and the constant media attention meant that I, who anyway was a good global citizen became more conscious and more vocal about the destruction of earth(people near and dear to me can vouch for that). I then happened to read a blog which gave a different spin to the whole problem of global warming. I of course was a skeptic to this new spin, in fact I responded to it massive intolerance at the possibility of there being another explanation to global warming. Global warming seems to be the first issue in a looong time that has global acceptance and affirmative actions being discussed. How can all the world leaders be wrong? How can all the media that I am exposed to be wrong? Then I read a bit on the net and then some more and finally saw this. Those who want this documentary and have net access to me, I can send it across, else you can watch it online. Just as much an eye opener as the Al Gore one, this gives more credible data (at least looks credible) on why humans are too small a player in the universal or earthly scheme of things. It tells:
1. Sun makes earth a lot hotter than CO2 can ever do.
2. The clouds help the Sun in this process
3. The amount of CO2 humans generate is less than 1% of the total CO2 emissions in the world.
4. The temperatures on earth have been going hot and cold for lot longer than humans and their industrialization.
It then goes a step further are disproves many of the claims made in "An Inconvenient Truth". The number of scientists who have come forth in this documentary when compared to "0" (if I remember right) in the Al Gore one gives more credence to this one. Am I converted, hmm... not quite. But I can see a lot of sense in what is being told here and I am now more open minded to consider the alternatives.
1. The climatologists will get a lot more grant money if the fear of global warming keeps lurking.
2. The developing or under developed economies will in all probability stop their economic growth if they were to follow the strict guidelines laid down by the developed countries to prevent global warming. For e.g. India has all the coal it needs to keep burning, but his constant CO2 threat is going to make these reserves next to useless.
3. Gives one more topic to the developed countries to align itself with the developing economies so that the developing economies ensure the already globalized companies in the west keep the margins high enough to ensure the quality of life in these developed countries.
If this sounds like a fresh convert speaking, let me assure you, the last two points above have been in my mind a long time, and this new explanation on global warming gives me a reasonable connection to the reasons. I completely agree with green peace activists and the environmentalists telling us to treat the planet better and be more environment friendly. But I now question the politically and economically backed motive in driving reforms down the throat of the "finally catching up" developing economies of the world!
I saw the documentary "An Inconvenient truth" a couple of months ago. It was a very passionate, dramatic and a bit of self propaganda presentation by Al Gore. It was quite a scary eye opener for me to see how our modernization was killing earth. On the back of this documentary and the constant media attention meant that I, who anyway was a good global citizen became more conscious and more vocal about the destruction of earth(people near and dear to me can vouch for that). I then happened to read a blog which gave a different spin to the whole problem of global warming. I of course was a skeptic to this new spin, in fact I responded to it massive intolerance at the possibility of there being another explanation to global warming. Global warming seems to be the first issue in a looong time that has global acceptance and affirmative actions being discussed. How can all the world leaders be wrong? How can all the media that I am exposed to be wrong? Then I read a bit on the net and then some more and finally saw this. Those who want this documentary and have net access to me, I can send it across, else you can watch it online. Just as much an eye opener as the Al Gore one, this gives more credible data (at least looks credible) on why humans are too small a player in the universal or earthly scheme of things. It tells:
1. Sun makes earth a lot hotter than CO2 can ever do.
2. The clouds help the Sun in this process
3. The amount of CO2 humans generate is less than 1% of the total CO2 emissions in the world.
4. The temperatures on earth have been going hot and cold for lot longer than humans and their industrialization.
It then goes a step further are disproves many of the claims made in "An Inconvenient Truth". The number of scientists who have come forth in this documentary when compared to "0" (if I remember right) in the Al Gore one gives more credence to this one. Am I converted, hmm... not quite. But I can see a lot of sense in what is being told here and I am now more open minded to consider the alternatives.
1. The climatologists will get a lot more grant money if the fear of global warming keeps lurking.
2. The developing or under developed economies will in all probability stop their economic growth if they were to follow the strict guidelines laid down by the developed countries to prevent global warming. For e.g. India has all the coal it needs to keep burning, but his constant CO2 threat is going to make these reserves next to useless.
3. Gives one more topic to the developed countries to align itself with the developing economies so that the developing economies ensure the already globalized companies in the west keep the margins high enough to ensure the quality of life in these developed countries.
If this sounds like a fresh convert speaking, let me assure you, the last two points above have been in my mind a long time, and this new explanation on global warming gives me a reasonable connection to the reasons. I completely agree with green peace activists and the environmentalists telling us to treat the planet better and be more environment friendly. But I now question the politically and economically backed motive in driving reforms down the throat of the "finally catching up" developing economies of the world!
1 comment:
Another danger posed by the pro-anthropogenic-GW community is the stigmatisation of dissenting voices. NASA Administrator Michael Griffin was nearly fired last week for his comments on 'climate change'. It's a shame, and a disgrace for science. I have wrote about the incident on my blog.
If billions of dollars have to be prevented from being spent on something that is an imaginary crisis, more people should start thinking your way - with an open mind. In any case, CO2 will not kill life on Earth; let's worry about things like pollution which has the potential to make the planet inhospitable.
Post a Comment