Gypsy Camp Blog

Global warming, or more accurately man-made global warming is the single biggest moral and political issue of our age. The western governments have bought into the notion that carbon dioxide produced by mans industrial activities is causing a rise in the temperature of the planet, that this temperature rise must be stopped to avoid global catastrophe. But what substantiating evidence exists to back up this claim?

It is getting increasingly more difficult to have a sensible discussion on the topic, such is its impetus, and the strongly held beliefs of its followers. A whole multi-billion pound industry has been created literally out of thin air, and will not take kindly to being told that its existence is superfluous.

The subject has not escaped government policy makers, and their actions are having a significant effect on the Western world. This ‘green policy’, based around carbon credits and the like, has been a significant time in the making, has its roots firmly embedded in social and economic policy, and will not disappear overnight should the premise of global warming be overturned.

Manufacturers everywhere are required to use CO2 emissions as a yardstick for anything from fridge freezer design to measuring how environmentally friendly business activities are, indeed these companies even have the option to offset their carbon production by paying a company to go and plant trees somewhere else in the world. While everyone in the world seems to be asking how or what we can do to reduce CO2 emissions, isn’t it time we asked the question why? Is CO2 an issue in the first place, or is it just a lot of hot air?

Photo of Cooling Tower by Matt Foster

While it may appear that the facts of man made global warming remain undisputed, you may be surprised to read that in a survey carried out in 2003, in which all 530 of the world’s climatologists were questioned whether they thought that the ’scientific debate about climate change is over’, 44% were in agreement, 10% remained uncertain, and the majority, 46% disagreed. It seems the majority believe there’s still something to discuss.[1]

In spite of this, the global warming naysayer is still very much in a minority, and not a popular one at that. The mainstream UK press and those who read it to form their beliefs are typically of the opinion that it is a problem that requires immediate action. Indeed the force behind the movement is so great that public admission of non-belief in (man made) global warming is met with considerable scorn.

What we can say without a doubt, is that the industry which has sprung up to cater to the ‘global warming show’ is worth billions of dollars, and employs millions worldwide. Budgets are continually increasing as worldwide panic sets in; recently, Barack Obama allocated $129bn to encourage solar power, hybrid cars and renewable energy. If it became clear that man was not causing global warming, what would all these people do?

I don’t think that true evidence will ever be found to prove or disprove the issue. As the split in opinion of climatologists demonstrates, climate is a highly complex science, and unlikely to be definitively understood by man any time soon, if ever.

Like most economic bubbles, it is almost always easier to go with the flow than to struggle against the current and risk being sucked under. The issue of CO2 and global warming is founded on the precautionary principle, and if we had to put words to it, it would look something like this:

“If carbon dioxide produced by man’s industrial activities is responsible for the global rise in temperature, if we can cut our emissions to an acceptable level (whatever that may be), and convince every other nation in the world to do the same, then ultimately we might be better off than if we had just stood by and done nothing.”

Does this sound like well balanced judgement, good clear thinking, or scaremongering of the first degree? There are as many ‘IF’ statements, as many unknowns, as a climate model. The majority of these are speculation. People who take action from a place of fear will never produce good results. Furthermore, consider the expenditure allocated for this speculative case, and where it might be better spent.

Sure, you might say. But shouldn’t we do something to save our planet, just in case? Money is only money, this is our planet we’re talking about here. Well, the majority of UK citizens might agree with that statement, but what about those citizens of China and India and Africa who are looking forward to industrialising, are they likely to be as concerned? They have more important fish to fry, they want cheap abundant energy sources, regardless of how much CO2 they produce. We’re talking Coal and Oil and Gas.

We have enjoyed industrialisation for many years, now it is the turn of China, India and Africa. They are looking forward to products and services that we have enjoyed for many years. It is totally inappropriate for us to demand that these countries behave in a particular way to suit our carbon plans for the future. We couldn’t wield a stick big enough to make that happen. I wouldn’t expect them to buy into such a ridiculous notion. What they may lack in technology, they more than make up for in their understanding of life on planet earth.

The UK government has a choice about how it goes ahead with these carbon reforms, even though the evidence is weak, and growing weaker by the day. But what we cannot do, is tell anyone else what to do. The Kyoto Protocol looks more and more absurd every day, as the target appear less and less achievable. The taxpayer will be paying an additional premium directly into the pockets of the businesses who work within the ‘carbon economy’.

If this happens, we in the UK will certainly have this additional cost added to our products and services, making them less competitive than products from countries which have no such concerns about carbon. It is more likely that shrewd businessmen, who ultimately answer to the bottom line, will just move their production elsewhere. This avoids the issue, but does nothing to combat the perceived threat of carbon emissions. While we may have an up-and-coming business sector in carbon management, I doubt we will be doing any business with the Chinese in this regard.

The political arena is not a clear cut case either. They realise more than most the oxymoron of ‘carbon neutral economic growth’. The two, more frequently, tread different paths; our current energy reserves, required for economic growth (transport, manufacturing, building etc) all release CO2 into the atmosphere. This, they tell us, is going to destroy the planet. So we have a clear choice; we can down tools and stop growing, or carry on as we have been. Seems like a fairly obvious choice to me.

Grangemouth Refinery, by Scottog

My aim here is not to pitch into the global warming debate with statistics or evidence of any kind. Many such things exist, and can be gathered to effect any result required (see below). I merely ask you to look to your common sense to see the reality of the situation. It would be nice if more people didn’t just take the press’s word for it, and considered the situation from a logical viewpoint, the viewpoint from the basis of life itself. When viewed from this perspective, the premise seems ridiculous.

Consider this planet we are living on. Was is just a cosmic mistake? Is it all random? How did it all come to be, in all of it’s beauty, perfection, and magnificence? How can the earth be such a perfectly balanced environment, providing it’s inhabitants with everything that they have ever identified that they need, in abundance (we have never run out of anything). Who or what lies behind this wonderful creation? If you believe that there is some creative force that has put all of this in place, then do you honestly think that it would allow the destruction of the planet, billions of years in the making, because of the burning of some previous recycled generations who inhabited the earth before?

Joy lies at the basis of the eternal expansion of this universe, and man and his creative thinking is what drives that evolution. To suggest that we’ve reached a peak in our creation, and that now society is diminishing in some way, is absurd. We must have an excuse to continue to create. To invent new and better ways of doing things, of living, of having fun, or living more in harmony with our planet. If we cannot, we surely die because there is no desire and when desire is gone, so has life.

The carbon debate reflects man’s creativity in flowing energy in new and creative ways. The only thing is, it is based on a false premise; that man is responsible for such grand scale effects such as the weather, or the temperature. The planet is a platform for us to create upon. We are not expected to adjust the orbit of the earth, nor the humidity in the atmosphere, nor the temperature of the sun. This is all being dealt with elsewhere. If you feel like it’s an impossible task to save the planet, there’s good reason; it’s not your job.

What is good is the spin offs of the situation; perceived shortage of oil, lack of security of energy supplies, pollution, oil wars all lead to cleaner alternative fuels developed. These are cleaner, less reliant on foreigners and their unstable economic or political systems, and reduce the squabbling over the ‘finite’ resources of planet earth. Even so, the planet is finding its balance and we cannot do anything to affect its stability.

Rather than looking st what’s going wrong with the planet, let’s just consider for a moment how much is going right. Consider how planet earth spins merrily in its orbit without bumping into other planets, we have an abundance of everything that we need, food grows year after year, air is purified, water is purified, the planet is a giant recycling machine, recycling the energy of life year after year. I’m sure we will develop better ways of living in harmony with the earth, but we mustn’t ever forget how stable and secure our world is. The animals don’t worry and they seems to get on just fine. How can so many curse the wonderful resources which are provided for our benefit?

As time passes, and fewer and fewer people are seeing the devastation predicted by the doom-mongers, the tide is gradually turning in the global warming debate. It is also becoming apparent how much money is up for grabs to those who are happy to work within the field. Is the world really warming up? As I stood on my patio in London in early February, building a considerable snowman, I pondered the question myself. Of course my snowman building skill were a bit rusty. The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change was held in March 2009, and asked the question “Global warming, was it ever an issue”. It seems that some are already talking about the issue in the past tense.

I won’t suggest for a moment that George W Bush was wrong; but he did resist climate change policy for a long time. He also hails from the large and powerful Bush oil family, who naturally want to sell oil to the people. On the other side of the coin is Al Gore’s travelling global warming show, and his movie “An Inconvenient Truth” which has been show to scare school children all over the western world. The documentary grossed over $49m, turning out to be something more convenient for Mr Gore.

If Al gore had titled his film, “Global Warming, don’t worry it’s all going to be OK”, one suspects he would have struggles to get back his investment in the project, although he might have done us a great service. Gore has a number of businesses catering to the Global Warming. I’m sure his film and book on the subject did no harm at all to their order books.

I am not in any way suggesting that any of this is wrong. In fact it is quite natural, and totally understandable. People act out of self-interest, always. While it might appear that they are being altruistic, there is always something in it for them. This is how the world works. Relationships, Jobs, Religion, Politics, etc. Whats in it for me? Economics rules because people act out of self interest and they always want to thrive as much as possible.

Fortunately there are other offerings which add some well needed balance to the debate; programs such as Martin Durkin’s 2007 polemic documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” which shows that not all of the worlds scientists agree with the established view, and still have the capacity to continually question evidence, as any good scientist should.

I hope that in the coming months and years that more and more balance is restored to the debate. At present, it all seems to be extremely one sided, an established fact and I suspect that title is undeserved. The regulations spawned from the premise grow daily. There is no doubt that the majority want to live more in harmony with our beautiful planet.

I’m sure we will continue to find better ways of doing things. I suspect that in the near future we will all find something else to focus upon, and the issue carbon management and global warming will fade away and be forgotten about as people regain their faith in life, and in the resilience of planet earth. We’re in good hands folks.

I was slightly embarrassed to read, in a recent engineering journal, professional engineers talk of Geo-Engineering; their plans to stop the planet from warming up. Have they lost all perspective? It seems they think their actions can have some impact on Mother Nature. It may give them something to do, but it will not yield any noticeable results. There are some things which we cannot control. The earth is one such thing. It was a good laugh to read their propositions, however.

What I like to think, and I usually go on my gut instincts here, is that the planet is doing fine. It is evolving, as are we all. It was here long before we showed up, and carbon dioxide was once a much larger constituent of the atmosphere before the plants helpfully turned some of it into oxygen for us to breathe. The earth will be around for a lot longer, as will we. Though we may get bogged down in the detail, we must put our actions into perspective of what we know about man; he didn’t create this planet, and he won’t destroy it either. There’s someone else in charge.

[1] Heartland Institute Study 2003

Related posts:

1. Global Warming? Hot Air. Man made climate change is the biggest single issue of...
2. Global Warming, the Global Hot Topic Outline...
3. Global Warming Quicker Than Forecast An increasingly large amount of scientific research, published since the...
4. To Halt Global Warming, Use Earth Friendly Products If you wish to assist contribute to the efforts to...
5. To Halt Global Warming, Use Earth Friendly Products If you wish to help contribute to the efforts to...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.