You may think it’s odd that a “prepping” website would be anti-“global-warming”. I hope I don’t lose half my audience by exposing my opinions on the matter… but here goes.
I’ve looked at the data associated with “global warming”, you know, the same stuff Al Gore based his “Inconvenient Truth” upon. He said that there was a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and atmospheric temperature, but that the correlation was “complicated”.
I reviewed the data. It’s not so much complicated as it is expansive (there’s a lot of data). But something interesting began to appear: the trend that Mr. Gore spoke about did indeed exist. Atmospheric temperature and atmospheric CO2 — or “carbon” in today’s lingo — are indeed related to one another.
That’s where the logic stops. You see, for Mr. Gore‘s theory to be correct, an increase in atmospheric CO2 causes an increase in atmospheric temperature. That’s what “global warming” is caused by, he says. And where does this atmospheric CO2 come from? Well, from us; from our pollution.
Unfortunately, the data doesn’t back that. Atmospheric temperatures rise, followed by atmospheric CO2 levels — by hundreds of years. Put another way around, the planet warms AND THEN carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases.
So, there is a correlation between the two variables, but the “complicated” part is that the correlation is literally backwards from the way everyone wants you to believe.
Now you’re asking if “global warming” comes AFTER atmospheric carbon dioxide increases, what came BEFORE “global warming”? What “caused” it? It just so turns out that according to the records that we have, within a decade prior to the increase in atmospheric temperatures there was dramatic increase in solar activity. Yes, folks, the sun causes “global warming” — at least according the the same logic that Gore used.
That having been said, bare in mind: correlation does not imply causation. In other words, just because two things are correlated doesn’t necessarily mean the one caused the other. For example, just because the grass is wet, that doesn’t mean that it’s raining. A local dog could have just come by and marked his territory; a water truck could have just sprayed down the dirt road next to the grass; a kid could have spilled his water bottle; a fish tank could have burst… etc.
So, with that background painted, a year ago tomorrow, just before the opening of the UN Copenhagen world climate summit, the British Meteorological Office issued a prediction: the mean world temperature for 2010 “is expected to be 14.58C, the warmest on record”.
Why did they do this? To save the planet? To keep the polar ice caps from melting? No, Met Office officials boasted that they hoped by their statements would persuade those in attendance to impose new and stringent carbon emission limits — which would eventually make people like Al Gore rich.
Ironically, in Britain is in the grip of a cold trend — just as it was last winter, and the winter before that! In fact, Britain has recently experienced the some of the coldest temperatures since 1996.
But reading more data reveals something else: for the past 10 years, global warming has stopped. With the exception of 1998 (when temperatures spiked because of a strong ‘El Nino’ effect) data shows that global temperatures have been flat, not for 10, but for the past 15 years.
So, why do I bring this up? You need to act now to tell Congress to REJECT any “carbon tax”! Taxing individuals and businesses wouldn’t “solve” the “global warming” problem anyway. It will just make the rich richer at the expense of making the poor poorer, and the government bigger. Two things we don’t want.
Now, I think pollution (in any form) is an offense against your family, against your neighbors, and against the world in which we all must share. But I also believe in the freedom to choose — and to live with the consequences of those actions.
That’s why I have this site. It’s about what I am doing to live simpler and cleaner, to be less reliant upon others, and to make a positive impact on the environment around me.
Those goals, those reasons aren’t “complicated”. They aren’t hard to understand. They aren’t going to be found to be fraudulent ten years from now. They’re the way our ancestors used to live so their children, and their children’s children would have a pristine place in which to live.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter in the comments below.