Global Warming: Is it for real?

The daily media drumbeat on global warming

     The coverage on global warming leads people to believe that this is a huge problem.  Just to list a few examples:

  • New York City saw a November and December without snow for the first time since 1877. And New Jersey had its warmest December since records started being kept 111 years ago,

  • Polar bears are starving and are dying out becoming therefore endangered species,

  • Glaciers are melting worldwide,

  • Cherry blossoms are seen in Washington D.C. in December,

  • The ‘El Nino’ phenomenon is back this year,

  • Australia is suffering from an unbelievable draught,

  • Europe has unusually warm weather,

  • NOAA coincidentally has announced today that 2006 was officially the warmest year on record for the U.S.

     People all over the world and of all ages have expressed their concern and are going “green” to stop this phenomenon.  Authoritative figures like former Vice President Al Gore with his “An Inconvenient Truth” movie and book and Prince Charles in England add credibility to the global warming experts driving people to take this seriously and act accordingly. 

Hold the presses    

     Is Global Warming really as big of an issue as the hype that is being generated?  Let’s look at some other data points that the press does not seem to publicize as much since it is contrary to the Global Warming theme:

  • Parts of the U.S. are experiencing extremely harsh weather such as the northwest,

  • The winter storm in Denver put about 340000 cows and steers at risk of dying,

  • An intensifying cold trough moving into the northwest Tuesday night and Wednesday moves south into California Thursday and Friday,

  • The cold weather jet stream is expected to migrate southward toward the southern states. This will open the door and allow cold air from Canada to pour southward on a much more frequent basis. The bottom line is that it will turn colder across a large portion of the nation by next week,

  • In December, a steady stream of snow coated cars and palm trees in
    Las Vegas,

  • Above average snow falls in the north and south Sierra Nevada mountain range.

     Perhaps winter is just coming a little bit later this year in some regions in our country compared to other years.

Can human behavior impact Global Warming?

     We stated in a previous article on our blog (link to it), we here at ‘Back to Common Sense’ believe that we may experiencing global warming but we do not share the popular belief that we as human beings are causing it. Here are some things to consider:

  • The greenhouse effect is fact but let us remember that it is caused by up to 98 percent by water vapors from oceans, lakes and rivers as well as by wildfire emissions and the rare occurrence of volcanic eruptions,

  • The global CO2 emissions for which we as people are responsible for are only 2 percent of the total greenhouse gas volume,

  • About a month ago, a United Nations report by the Food and Agricultural Organization, entitled Livestock’s Long Shadow concluded that and we quote: Cow ‘emissions’ are more damaging to the planet than CO2 from cars! Can you imagine, the roughly 1.5 billion cows are greater contributors to global warming than our cars and trucks?

     This has to be ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ for the likes of Al Gore, Prince Charles and the environmental-warning organizations everywhere. The media, of course, played along and this U.N. report, referenced here, was never put on the front page of any American newspaper nor was it even given a mention on the evening news. The midnight comedians probably talked and made fun about it but it certainly did not receive the same kind of coverage as the warm temperatures in Central Park.

     We here at ‘Back to Common Sense’ refuse to buy into this excessive propaganda of the so called self anointed global warming experts and we will stay firm in our common sense belief that this period of global warming is part of a regular sun cycle and that we will see in a few years a reversal of this phenomenon.  We encourage the media to report on these “Truths” by checking the facts for themselves.
     This article and others on Back to Common Sense are designed to provoke further thought and investigation.   It is not the intent for the articles to be politically biased. Sources are referenced in each article to encourage readers to delve into the supporting material.  We welcome all readers to participate with their point of view either in support or contrary with additional information sources.


4 Responses to Global Warming: Is it for real?

  1. tamino says:

    There are so many severe factual errors in your post, one hardly knows where to begin. So I’ll pick the most egregious example:

    ==> “The global CO2 emissions for which we as people are responsible for are only 2 percent of the total greenhouse gas volume, …”

    Answer me this: why is it that before the industrial revolution, CO2 concentration was stable at about 280 ppmv (parts per million by volume) for 11,000 years, and in fact hadn’t been above 300 ppmv for 23 million years — but levels today are 380 ppmv. That’s an increase, since the industrial revolution, of about 36%.

  2. We stand by our statement that “global CO2 emissions for which we as people are responsible for are only 2 percent of the total greenhouse gas volume”.

    The CO2 concentration may have risen, but this doesn’t affect the portion of global CO2 emissions that man can affect. The remaining 98% is what happens naturally. You are comparing two different percentages.

  3. Jim Bosser says:

    I would be curious to find out where Tamino got his reliable information going back from 11000 years to 23 million years. It’s probably from the same sources who now predict the end of the world in this century. What a bunch of arrogant clowns there are.

  4. tamino says:

    To the Common Sense Editors:

    You’re entitled to stand by your belief; I just hope you realize it has no basis in fact. Whoever fed you that line about “2%” was pulling a fast one; you have been hoodwinked.

    To satisfy Jim Bosser’s curiosity:

    I got my CO2 concentration data from the Mauna Loa Atmospheric Observatory, the Law Dome Ice core, the Greenland Ice Sheet Program, the Vostok Ice core, and the EPICA dome C ice core. In short, it comes from the peer-reviewed scientific literature. But you probably dismiss actual scientists (a group of which I am a member) as “arrogant clowns.”

    Where did you get your information?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: