RSS
Home
Why the rush on the global warming debate?
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Are we too quick to make assumptioms?
As scientists reveal new models both for and against human-caused distress to our planet, why the rush on the global warming debate?
In a Wall Street Journal story by Jeffrey Ball he points out that even though a United Nations specific panel won the Nobel Peace prize for stating humans are "unequivocally" and "very likely" the largest cause of global warming, the debate continues.
I read the Wall Street Journal story and the naysayers of human-caused global warming base their conclusions on scientific models of data. Buy why the rush on the global warming debate? This reminds me of the stories you see on television news shows every once in a while where a scientist has found a promising cure for a deadly disease and then never heard from again.
Even Majib Latif, a climate scientist from Germany says in the Wall Street article, "You need to know what you can believe and can't believe from the models." What are these models saying? According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) the Earth's temperate is dropping.
Supporters of human-caused global warming blame the temperature drop in changes in the ocean's currents and what has gone down, will go back up through continued fossil fuel damage, CO2 distress and the greenhouse gas effect.
Whatever side of the global warming debate you're on, how can scientists say that our use of non-renewable energies will not harm our environment in the long run? I am dismayed by the continued argument on who is right and who is wrong.
Finally, why the rush on the global warming debate at all? Why should we allow inadequate studies and models by scientists to make too-fast decisions before all the facts are in? Even Majib Latif says, "There is a lot of room for improvement for these models," so why release them at all before all the data is in?
It seems to me a larger case can be made for too many gas guzzling cars on the road and sopping up our non-renewable energies that do cause harm to the environment show more evidence that global warming is to blame by human activity. If you are a naysayer of global warming, it's hard to deny these cold, hard facts.
I'm not so impressed by the Obama Administration and it's call to find alternative energy sources, that's just politicking. I'm more impressed with facts, not models, at least not until they have something that is conclusive.
Supporters of human-caused global warming can find more information at Ecohearth.
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
