The Green Earth Has Global Warming

The earth will grow warmer and warmer, and it will happen faster and faster. Does this sound scary? Most scientists think it's scary indeed. They say all the people in the world and all the industrial nations of the world, must work together now to stop global warming. They say we must work quickly. (Rockwell 25-26)

Some people say we don't cause global warming. They say that the earth's climate has changed many times in the past. It has grown warmer or colder, and many great and drastic changes in temperature happened before there were any people on the earth. They say that since we don't know what caused those changes, we don't really know what's causing the changes that are taking place now. (Rockwell 18)

These two passages from a book, written for children ages 5-9, summarize the two basic viewpoints in the debate over global warming. To one extreme, there are scientists who claim that global warming is most certainly anthropogenic (man-made) and that the results of this warming will be catastrophic and deadly. On the other end of the spectrum are those who claim that mankind is too insignificant to cause these changes, if they even acknowledge the changes exist. They claim that any climate changes are due to natural, cyclical processes. Many scientists are considered to be alarmists, using scare tactics to force legislation regulating carbon emissions, deforestation, and fossil fuel usage. They see skeptical scientists as a fringe group with their heads in the sand, possibly recruited and funded by big industry. Somewhere between despair and denial, there must be another approach to this important issue. Both groups are insistent and unwilling to take another opinion seriously, but maybe there is some truth to both sides of the argument. Maybe the real answer lies somewhere in the middle. Instead of presenting either side as fact, all evidence needs to be considered equally and objectively.

Unfortunately, this fair and balanced approach is nowhere to be found in the media. Even children's books and textbooks are presenting manmade global warming as an undeniable fact, implying that anyone who denies this is somehow using faulty research or ignoring irrefutable evidence. Using hype and fear can scare the public into action or it can have the opposite effect. People might become so overwhelmed and afraid that it's easier to pretend nothing is happening. When being bombarded with images of devastating floods, hurricanes, droughts, and melting icecaps, it is easier to tune it all out and turn off the TV. When the future seems so bleak, and the public is told that this is all inevitable, most people will think there is nothing they can do to stop it. "Much of the debate over global warming is predicated on fear, rather than science. Global warming alarmists see a future plagued by catastrophic flooding, war, terrorism%u2026crop failures, mosquito-borne diseases, and harsh weather" (Inhofe 24).

Any attempt to limit or get rid of oil, gas, or coal, which provide 90% of our energy, would cause an economic apocalypse%u2026There is a correlation between our energy consumption and our success. We don't succeed in the United States in spite of (spoken emphasis) energy consumption; we succeed because of energy consumption. (Global Warming: What's Up)

Even if CO2 emissions are not the cause of climate change, there is no debate over the pollution, such as smog and oil spills, caused by fossil fuels. There is also the simple fact that they are non-renewable resources that will eventually run out. Add to that the United States' dependence on foreign oil and the exorbitant gasoline prices, and there is a very good argument to phase out the use of fossil fuels. Yes, part of the success of the United States can be attributed to its ability to harness energy sources and put them to use for economic growth. However, the excessive energy consumption of the United States is not something to be proud of. Naturally, Palmer and others like him will continue to oppose any idea that harms their financial interests. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" (Upton Sinclair). Any research findings that the fossil fuel industry uses to support its cause cannot necessarily be trusted.

Most people also don't understand how the theory of global warming works. They think that a really cold winter is evidence that global warming is a myth. However, scientists that support the ideas of global warming are referring to long-term climate change. Climate refers to environmental patterns over a long period of time. Weather refers to short-lived events, and can have isolated extremes. One of the predictions of many scientists is that global warming will cause more extreme weather: hotter summers, longer droughts, colder winters, and stronger storms. According to their theories, Europe could be tossed into another ice age because of global warming, not turned into a tropical paradise. This is because of the effect global warming could have on ocean currents.

Skeptics will often find any opportunity to attack the views of scientists based on some isolated weather event, or the lack of such an event. If the scientists predict increasing frequency and intensity of hurricanes, skeptics will point out that this last hurricane season was extremely mild, with the only intense storms hitting Mexico. Ultra-conservative commentator, Rush Limbaugh, doesn't just consider global warming to be a myth; he calls it a hoax and a religion. "It's got salvation, got everything in it. It has the primary ingredient of every religion: faith. Because none of it can be proved" (Limbaugh 4). Limbaugh also takes issue with the use of the word "consensus" by global warming activists, and is right to do so. "Consensus and science-I got blue in the face saying this-don't and cannot mutually co-exist" (Limbaugh 4). If scientists had reached any sort of consensus, this would be a dead issue. Most scientists agree that the temperature of the earth has been gradually increasing, but that doesn't mean they agree on the possible causes or consequences.

Written By: Andrea Trivisonno