Monday, November 17, 2008

Global Warming: Wake-up Call or Hoax?

How much do you trust your government? How you much do you believe what you read in press or see on TV? What you think about Global Warming? There are completely controversial opinions on Global Warming in the media and Internet. Some call it the reality and wake-up call, other the biggest hoax in the history. What about you?

The problem is that in many general issues, like Global Warming, it is hard for us to make up our mind, since we do not possess objective data, and we do not have required expertise on this data evaluation. All we can - listen, read, and use our common sense for the facts evaluation. But, can you be sure that the facts you read are true? Oh, may be they are true, but just inadequately presented. That means that in some cases, we might lean to the side with loudest arguments.

I remember some discussion in my college. One guy said: “Everybody knows that…” His opponent replied: “Yes, everybody knows, that what you said is not true”.

In terms of Global Warming, I was among those skeptics, who indeed consider this concept as a big fat lie. I should be happy, that I got support from media. There’s a new documentary feature film “Not evil, just wrong” being produced by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney. It counters the dominant global warming alarmism, particularly Al Gore’s widely distributed film.


From their Website
This is the film Al Gore and Hollywood don’t want you to see. Al Gore has just closed two “green funds” after collecting almost three billion dollars and Barack Obama has raised 280 millions to promote his message. We have already raised almost 1 million to make the documentary and want to setup an Obama style grassroots initiative to collect a further 3.5 millions so that those who want to use flawed science to raise our taxes and close our factories are made accountable. Send whatever you can to get the truth to our cinemas, newspapers and schools so that an issue that threatens to damage so many lives finally gets the debate it deserves.

Sounds a bit hysterical to me… Appeal for money diminishes for me the movie credibility, even thou I did not see it yet. No, check the trailer for this documentary. Does not look as factual argumentation... Agree, it is not a movie yet, but that is how authors represent it to the public, so that is how they see their documentary themselves.

No, I am far from being expert in the Global Warming debate. I have, however the system of beliefs on the topic, that can be expressed in the series of claims:

  1. People are threat to environment, and if the human operations will not be supervised, the damage might be significant, and even fatal (Atomic Stations Accidents).
  2. Environment-friendly approach should be leveraged with the modern world needs, but any activities should be reviewed from the environment threat point of view.
  3. Global Warming is a Hoax. The temperature deviations throughout the history of humankind were natural and were not triggered by the people. What did dinosaurs bad to the environment to be punished by death during Global Cooling?
Anyway, I am glad, that the topic is on the top of the news, dragging people attention (Google Top Searches today). For those, who wants to understand the issue in more details, take a close look on the Global Warming Petition Project, supported by many scientists, pronouncing that the human-caused global warming hypothesis has no scientific validity, and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth.


Project claims that 31,072 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,021 with PhDs. Can it be considered as substantial proof? No way! But that can serve as substantial ground for the doubt to your willingness throwing your tax money on the questionable issue.

Here I find some people discussion on the topic that you might read if you are interesting in seeing different people Global Warming perception:


Tarun Kumar said...

Researchers have uncovered the role of low-level air pollution on heart disease. Studies have shown that EPA standards are not low enough to protect our blood vessels from inflammation leading to heart attack and stroke. CRP blood test levels measure inflammation in the body, and can be controlled with cholesterol lowering medicines, or statins. Elevated CRP levels promote heart attacks.Taking things a bit further, newer research shows that we can’t seem to escape damage to blood vessels even in the home. Community monitoring stations fall short of measuring the total amount of individual exposure to pollutants that can increase our risk of heart disease.

Michael Pekker said...

Thank you for your comment. The new research means that the EPA standards should be revised, tightening the permitted pollution levels. However, is that possible with the current level of technology? If positive, would not the costs of the new regulation implementation be too high?