Home The Way I See It Back to Story List

Global Warming, Global Cooling, Climate Change which is it?
by Carlos Canas
published July 2015

As a 53 year old asthmatic I spent many a year fearing another drizzly winter. You see those years when we had long drizzly winters were the worst years of my life. Spending day after day, week after week wheezing and gasping for air. As a child growing up in the 1960s I noticed that we had very wet years back then. In the 1970s the trend started to change and by the 1980s the Valley had become almost desert like. Hot dry days almost year round. Now we see the cycle heading back to the 1960's wetter, cooler cycle.

Now to the point at hand. Al Gore and many scientists want us to believe their dire warnings of a climate warming that will have catastrophic effects on the planet. Their reasoning is that our climate is changing because we drive too many cars, we have too many factories, we have too many people, and we have too many cows breaking wind. As in the liberal mind set these folks refuse to look at the obvious culprit that has been changing our climate since the beginning of time, our sun. Instead these people want us to believe that we have the power to change climate on a global scale.

Do we humans have the power to pollute? Do we have the power to change the landscape of the earth? The answer to those questions is yes. But are we responsible for climate change on a global scale? Many scientists and I believe the answer to be no. The sun's solar cycle has been proven to play a large part on our weather patterns. As such I will now list some interesting facts that I have found in various studies. Keep in mind that our schools today refuse to even allow for discussion on the possibility that anything other than man's actions could possibly be responsible for the warming, cooling or changing of Earth's climate conditions. From article titled Tiny Solar Activity Changes Affect Earth's Climate (source - www.space.com); "Even small changes in solar activity impact Earth's climate in significant and surprisingly complex ways."

"The sun is a constant star, The sun varies in the amount of light it emits by only 0.1 percent over the course of a relatively stable 11 year long pattern known as the solar cycle. Still the light reaching the top of the Earth's atmosphere provides about 2500 times as much energy as the total of all other sources combined."

In another article titled, Why I Am a Climate Change Skeptic; Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore PHD states, "I am skeptical that humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future. There is no scientific proof of this hypothesis, yet we are told, 'the debate is over' and 'the science is settled'." " I add to this my understanding of a hypothesis. This is a statement made at the onset of a scientific exploration. One states what they believe the outcome should be in a scientific test and after the tested hypothesis has been tested using the same variables time and time again if the results are the same each time the hypothesis is proven correct. Well in the 1970s we were told to expect a freezing of our world if we did not do something, then a few years ago we were told that the world was going to burn up and mankind would cease to exist due to rising temperatures. Now we are being told that the climate will change if we continue down the path we are on. Thus any earthquake, hurricane, tidal wave or tornado can be blamed on our human actions. Kind of sounds like blaming Bush for anything that happens in Washington.

Continuing with Dr. Moore's comments: "In fact the earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization. Recently, the IPCC announced for the umpteenth time we are doomed unless we reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to zero. Effectively this means either reducing the population to zero, or going back 10,000 years before humans began clearing forests for agriculture. This proposed cure is far worse than adapting to a warmer world, if it actually comes about. By its constitution, the IPCC has a hopeless conflict of interest. Its mandate is to consider only the human causes of global warming, not the many natural causes changing the climate for billions of years."

Once again let me interject here. Doesn't this sound like the race baiters who blame black deaths, black incarceration, black injustice on whites, and the police instead of looking at other factors which may be the true reason for so much black injustice and poverty ... namely glorification of thug lifestyle, a negative attitude towards education, a skyrocketing number of fatherless homes, a distrust of any authority figure.

Back to Dr. Moore: "If the IPCC did not find humans were the cause of warming, or if it found warming would be more positive than negative there would be no need for the IPCC under its present mandate. To survive, it must find on the side of the apocalypse."

While I could go on for many more pages I hope I have given you a reason to question and to research more thoroughly the issue of Global Climate Change. You see there is much more to examine before we say the science is settled.

Should we pollute less? Yes. But America is NOT the main culprit. To see who is look to the countries like China who has sent us millions of items laced with poisonous chemicals. These are the ones not following environmental laws.