Hysteria is the Real Threat, Not Global Warming
It has been a week of environmental fervor and there has been much discussion in the media and the internet on warming targets and what the global concensus should be.
Many are excitedly asking, "are the developed world's targets not enough and are the third world leaders not doing enough?"
With not all participants at the G8 Summit Italy agreeing on Global Warming targets, it should also be noted that not all environmental scientists agree whether is world is actually warming or not.
Professor Ian Plimar is one such multi-disciplined scientist who openly disagrees with the 1996 IPCC report. He has written many peer-reviewed scientific papers on the issue and published numerous books detailing alternative scientific research showing the earth has instead begun a period of global cooling.
So then why is there so much hype and hysteria promoting one position on global warming?
An article by Andrew Alexander of the UK news website "Mail Online" describes the global warming supporters (warmists) as having "semi-religious fervour" and that:
They are like medieval preachers, proclaiming to baying crowds that the end of the word is nigh.
Andrew then suggests that not everyone is convinced that Anthropogenic (man made) Global Warming is in fact real science and notes that since the 1996 IPCC report was released:
the world has disobligingly stopped warming. And two years of global cooling erased nearly 30 years of recorded temperature rises.
Amongst all the hysteria, the quiet voice of reason asks us to pause and consider whether all the hype is real, to question the reported facts and to read what the alternatives are.
For the sake of our children and future generations, let's not rush into locking the world into economically unsustainable carbon emmission schemes based on one IPCC report that is not fully supported by the wider scientific community, despite all the hype.
Most Recommended Comment
San Pedro de A, Malaga, Spain