We will write a custom Research Paper on Global Warming Skepticism and Reliable Facts specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Ever since time immemorial, environmental issues and concerns have been a fundamental constituent of human life. Principally, this has been majorly based on the fact that much of the human life greatly depends on the rather shifty environmental patterns; that is why scientists and environmentalists have been at the forefront of researching and conserving the environment, respectively, so as to ensure the sustainability of humanity.
However, it has not been an easy road for these environmental conservatives, there have been a lot of hiccups in the form of human casualties, plant and animal extinction, incurable diseases, among many other problems which have slowed down the journey towards an “ultimately safe” and “sustainable” world. Amongst the increasingly growing environmental concerns today; is the issue of Global warming. And in as much as so much information has been disseminated to the public (via the mass media); there is still very little truth that is known about it (Marshall, 2007).
Wollstein (2007) allegedly equates this worrying trend to the misinformation by various opinion leaders in schools, governments, mass media, and even the society in general. He continues by saying that a large percentage of these people misinform others due to their “ignorance” about the truth. The remaining few—whom he says is the most influential type of these opinion leaders—do it because there is a catch to what they say i.e. some financial benefit, a promotion at work, some awards, or a combination of either of the above (as was in the case of Al Gore, which I will later explicate).
But before I start getting carried away and delving deeper into the intrinsic details of global warming, let’s begin with the basics—what is global warming, and is the skepticism about it justified, or is there some element of truths that we ought to know about it?
It is in answering the above question (which I will do in a short while), that I am going to circumspectly walk you through the intricate fallacies and facts about global warming. Based on the authoritative and scholarly research I have done on this topic, I will additionally expose the problems associated with the environmental concern of global warming and then go a mile further by offering you poignant and concise solutions.
There are many definitions that have been advanced by different scholars so as to depict what global warming is, and quoting all of them here would probably waste a lot of my invaluable space and your priceless time. So in general-yet representatively inclusive-terms, Global warming simply refers to the average temperature increase of the earth’s surface air and that of oceans. So many misconceptions have falsified what global warming is really about. So I am going concurrently compare both sides as I further this discussion.
Preliminarily, Wollstein (2007) observes that, over the recent past, there have been robust debates between those who believe in the existence of global warming against its skeptics. According to the singer (1998), the main bone of contention has been on the exact causes of global warming. To the proponents, global warming is caused by excess emission of carbon dioxide in the air, which in turn, leads to the depletion of the ozone layer. This eventually increases the heat to levels that are “dangerous” for human, plant, and animal existence (Wollstein, 2007). So, according to the projections of these proponents, the entire human race may be faced out based on the documented continuous increase of global temperatures—unless we resort to cutting down our carbon dioxide emissions.
On the other hand, skeptics think quite differently. Wollstein (2007) writes that the majority of the latter group do not even believe in the existence of global warming in the first place. The sporadic numbers remaining, who partially believe in it, strongly oppose the perception by the proponents, which say that humans are the prime cause of global warming. These skeptics principally argue that the increase in global temperatures results from natural weather patterns Singer (1997). So what really are the truths and falsities in the parallel thoughts by these two groups?
To begin with, it is unarguably true that there have been dynamic changes in weather patterns in the world (Easton and Goldfarb, 2009). Marshall (2007) is however quick to point that “Earth is not the only planet to be experiencing climate change in our solar system currently.” According to him, several other planets have been witnessing the same, so it is only logical to expect nothing different for earth.
He goes further and cites the recent astronomical findings that indicate alleged “global warming” in Pluto, the 2006 reports of storms similar to “our” hurricanes in Jupiter, National geographic news reports of increasing temperatures in Mars, enormous storms in Saturn and lastly; the periodic ice age that was documented to have happened in Mars just like it has been on earth. So according to Marshall, all these findings sufficiently augment the argument that what we are experiencing is something naturally normal.
Moreover, Marshall (2007) cites the authoritative writings of Timothy Ball—a renowned climatology Doctor from Canada—who importantly says that approximately 30 years ago, the same craze going around the world now on global warming, is the exact thing that was talked of in the 1970s. Only that back then, it was the “global cooling” which, as we now know, never came to pass. As a matter of fact, we are now experience the exact opposite, so where are the scientists of that time who were talking of the “doomsday” when would freeze people to death? To Ball, the current weather patterns are occurring, because that is what they always do; occur.
Additionally, it is verifiably true that there have been increasingly hot temperatures over the last decade (Marshall, 2007; Singer, 1997; Easton and Goldfarb, 2009, 15-30). Similarly, it is provably true that the hot temperatures we are experiencing now are in fact cooler than it was 1000 years ago (Marshall, 2007). However, since most influential proponents of global warming—in conjunction with some governments—want to make the statistics look grimmer than it really is, such information is rarely talked of. To demonstrate this, Wollstein (2007) reports that “While the UN’s 1995 Global Temperature Chart clearly demonstrates that the earth was much warmer than today during the Medieval Warm Period, more recent UN temperature charts have eliminated the Warm Period altogether.”
Another example is the cooked statistics and graphs that Al gore used in his “politically accurate” documentary—which, as expected, rewarded him with more political power and an academy movie award for being a best seller (Marshall, 2007; Wollstein 2007). Numerous climatologists, environmental researchers and academicians have been able to come out strongly to expose Al gore as a puppet that was playing to the tune of the government.
And as if that is not enough, in his movie, he omits several important medieval times which are fundamental in explaining the current climatic happenings. Someone might ask where the media (who are charged with the mandate of gate-keeping the public from such derogative content) was during all this time. Well, in case you still do not know, the new meaning of Fourth Branch-another name for the media-is that they simply act as another arm of the government on top of the three branches of judiciary, legislature and executive.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
Consequently, they only tell you what is deemed as necessary and palatable by their corporate masters. Anything that might disturb the status quo and their or disrupt the smooth running of their highly classified profit-making cartels, is tightly tinned and canned away from you.
Another myth commonly spread by these true followers of global warming is that the observance of the Kyoto protocol signed in 1997 will greatly help preventing the global warming at no costs (Wollstein, 2007). Many examples from numerous scholars abound to explicate how this is a big lie and how costly it will be to your pockets if you adopt this route. However, I will just give the example of the implementation of “green bulbs.” First of all, these energy saving bulbs—which according to its proponents—are to be adopted in the next two years. This might be extremely difficult since the current technologies make it complex for their adoption.
The easiest way they can go about it is replacing the electrical technology with their own. This, together, with the expensiveness of the green bulbs will therefore disadvantage those who can not pay for the inception of their “green” light. This whole farce is just targeted at enriching some individuals and has got nothing to do with the environment. Marshall (2007) ardently culminates these activities by referring to their pretense as “A convenient lie for those who want to exert control and collect money.”
As a matter of fact, their efforts in mitigating too much Carbon dioxide emissions is deceptive—to say the least. Wollstein (2007) openly documents the existence of greenhouse factories, vehicles and industries from as early as 1650 AD. How comes the high CO2 levels did not affect their climate? This even reminds me of what I learned sometime back in my biology class. In biology, we are told that the ecosystem has its natural way of balancing itself, so even in the cases where there are excesses; it will find a way to restore balance (Easton and Goldfarb, 2003).
To further explain this point, Wollstein (2007) reports that repeated climatic studies conducted by different people indicate that at most, only 6% of atmospheric carbon dioxide is produced by human activity; so even if all vehicles, manufacturing companies, aero planes and trains were wiped out, there still would be no substantial effect. This is simply because up to 90% percent of carbon dioxide is emitted from water vapor which comes from evaporation of seas, oceans lakes and rivers. So if they want a faster way of reducing the carbon dioxide; let them start with the water bodies and let us live in peace (Glover, 2007).
In spite of being great critics of the misconceptions of global warming, Glover (2007) and Wollstein (2007) articulately admit that, in as much as human activities do not primarily because the temperature increases, they greatly accentuate it. So it is important that we all work towards preserving the environment—not just on global warming, but also on other fundamental areas. Marshall (2007) additionally says that the conservation of the environment is something paramount; and should be done at all times regardless of whether there is a reward to our actions, or not.
Up to this point, some people may think that I am against environmental conservation and the efforts towards establishing a sustainable environment in the world. Well, on the contrary, I am in fact a big supporter of safe environment practice. It is just that masquerading selfish hidden agendas and misusing resources then blatantly lying that we are trying to mitigate global warming; is not my way of supporting the sustainable environment agenda. It is high time we become true to one another and work together to save the environment that direly needs our genuine help rather than fabricating facts and trying to force them down each others’ throats (Easton and Goldfarb, 2003).
I fully concur that if not well managed, the increasing temperatures can have devastating effects. But on the other side, we can look at this issue positively—just in the same way when others complain of their glasses looking half empty, others celebrate their being half way full. Once we adopt such a mindset, then I believe that even if we get to the point where we have to contend with effects global warming, we will be able to go through it; just like the people who survived the little ice age period of 1450 to 1850 and the warm period around 11AD (Singer, 2007).
As for now, let us play our collective parts in the quest for an “ultimately safe” or sustainable world since prevention is better than cure. But then again, who are we kidding; there is no point in time that the environment will be “ultimately safe” or fully sustainable for everyone. So in as much as we may constantly strive for that safety; it is only logical to hope for the best, while anticipating the worst—incase it happens. Personally, I do believe (and hope) it does not ever come to the latter!
Easton, T.A. and Goldfarb, T. D. (2009). Principles of Environmental Science: Inquiry and Applications (Custom 5th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Easton T.A. and Goldfarb T. D. (2003). Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues. (Custom 13th Ed.).New York: McGraw-Hill.
Glover, P. C. (2007). Ten Myths of Global Warming. Global Warming Hysteria. Web.
Marshall, A. G. (2007). Global warming: A Convenient Lie. GlobalResearch.ca. Web.
Singer, F. (1998). Global Warming: Fact and Myth. Capitalism Magazine. Web.
Wollstein, J. (2007). Global Warming: Myths and Reality. International Society for Individual leadership. Web.