With all this snow we've been having, I thought this would be a great opportunity to discuss global warming. They seem to go hand-in-hand. With frigid temperatures across the country, it seems global warming is approaching just as Al Gore predicted. Or maybe his inconvenient truth was just one hundred percent inconvenient.There has been much speculation in the past couple of years about how we as Americans are threatening this planet by living on it. Our very means of survival (and privileged conveniences) such as travel by vehicle, farming, and breathing have been said to create a warming trend which is harming the environment. Therefore, we must take action, according to these experts in fields unrelated to climatology.
I advocate recycling as much as the next person. In fact, my family did this before it was popular. I think penguins and seals and baby polar bears are very cute and should not meet their death all at once. I would hate to see their homes melted away by the obnoxious country we live in and its 300 million citizens. Only WE can stop global warming.
However, I beg the question: Why fix what isn't broken?
Many have jumped on the band wagon to change the atmosphere by cutting back on the pollutants we put in the air. I have to say I remain a skeptic that this earth has stood for so many years while being entirely invaded by humans. A recent hurricane in Haiti seems to show that the weather has a more negative effect on us than we do on the weather. I would think that with all the typhoons, earthquakes, and cyclones the earth has gone through that it would have destroyed itself a long time ago, if that were the case. Essentially, the scare of global warming is what is known to some as "hatred against humanity."
In his article "The Religion of Global Warming," Dr. Edward F. Blick aims to disprove the facts provided by its biggest advocates. Blick, who spent fifty years at the University of Oklahoma as a professor of Engineering and worked as an adjunct professor of medicine and meteorology, investigates some of the most serious claims made with surprising results.
The experts in environmental change are flooding the media with delusions of an imminent disaster if we do not radically alter how we live. Apparently, our use of fossil fuels has disposed too much carbon dioxide into the air. We alone are at fault for causing the excessive warming our planet is seeing, which is also melting the polar ice caps. In an effort to save ourselves, but more importantly, the earth and its creatures, a plan of action has been created which allows only one million Americans to live after it is put into effect.
Yes, it's true. I'm afraid you'll have to go. Polar bears come first, mind you.
The United Nations has decided that to save the planet, they must control what we eat, where we live, what industries can remain and which ones will be shut down. America as we know it will be transformed into a habitat for 3% of its current population. Not only will we lose much of what we need to prosper, but it will cost billions upon billions of dollars that the US does not have. And the cost for this will be paid out of your pocket. And your great-great-great grandchildren's pockets, if we haven't decimated the world by then.
By removing oil, coal, and natural gas, we lose all transportation, along with chemical plants and steel mills. This is ludicrous, as is the notion that we could live on only carbon dioxide-free energy. We could get away with this if perhaps we still had nuclear energy, but the same people who are petitioning for the earth now are the same ones who destroyed nuclear energy. They did that thirty years ago.
Also, make sure you lose your appetite for meat and dairy products, because farm animals are contributing to global warming as well and will promptly be removed if the UN has its way.
With the doomsday predictions and the arguments that somehow seem like common sense, it's easy to get caught up in saving the world when it sounds like such a good idea. But being good stewards of the earth doesn't mean killing off a bunch of humans and not using our resources. There's a few other things those higher up refused to mention, but that's why we have scientists who are actually trained in meteorology and such to dispel the rumors and grace us with facts.
Did you know?:
Greenland, one of the ice capitals of the world, gained 11 billion tons of ice per year in a decade (from 1992-2002).
If carbon dioxide was the cause of warming, there should be an equal amount of warming in both the northern and southern hemisphere. As the atmosphere would have it, the carbon dioxide levels are the same, but the warming in each location is not. Obviously, there must be something else causing this.
The 1930s saw record high temperatures, but no one complained then. In the last seventy years, the only state to even reach a record high was North Dakota back in the 90s. For good reason, global warming caused no stir seven decades ago: it didn't exist then and it doesn't exist now.
The population of polar bears has actually increased rather than decreased in 11 of Canada's 13 regions.
Grapes used to be grown in England from 1000-1400 AD. Farmers can no longer do this because temperatures are not as warm then as they are now.
Did you know that there is absolutely no concrete evidence of global warming?
Granted, humans contribute to three billion tons of carbon dioxide that go into the air each year, a significant amount, no?
Examine how much the ocean, vegetation, soils, and atmosphere contribute each year and suddenly, it seems ridiculous that we would really pose such a threat. (39,000 billion + 2,200 billion + 750 billion= 41,590 billion tons compared to our three billion.)
is a member of the 
