One of the most prevalent stories we hear about today is the observed century-scale rise in the average temperature of the Earth’s climate system and its related adverse effects. This phenomenon is referred to as global warming, or climate change. Multiple lines of scientific evidence show that the climate system is warming. Many notable figures and committees, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, have urged others to take action to prevent the deterioration of our planet before it’s too late. Most countries are parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, whose ultimate objective is to prevent dangerous anthropogenic climate change. But what do they really mean when they suggest the theory that the world will eventually completely deteriorate due to global warming? We need to question the legitimacy of these claims and consider whether it is worth taking action for something we are not totally confident of believing. Many of these accusations that so-called scientists bring up are not entirely accurate, nor reliable. It is time we analyze this topic deeper and consider other sides to the argument rather than believing what your local environmental activist thinks. The agenda that activists advocate to the public on combating climate change is simply an impediment to our daily lives. Global warming should be considered an inconsequential matter and any further action taken causes a hindrance to humanity.
First of all, most scientific evidence and consensus suggesting that global warming is largely due to human influence are extremely inconsistent and unreliable. In fact, in the early seventies, scientists actually believed that global cooling was occurring. However, once the planet started to warm up, that belief changed really quickly. The lack of consistency only just starts here. Another thing to consider is the fact that America has endured the worst winters on record recently, and the 2009 hurricane season was also among the mildest. But when our winters were mild and the 2005 hurricane season brought four major storms to the U.S. coast, Katrina among them, the warmers said this validated their theory. It is clear that they are ignoring the obvious evidence that does not support their claim, yet they emphasize each and every case where it does back their beliefs. The activists ignore the data that directly refute their judgments in which they continue to express. The primary scientific argument for global warming is that there is a scientific consensus that it’s occurring. Well, these consensuses seem extremely bias and fabricated after closer examination. Additionally, climate models and predictions about the impact of global warming have repeatedly been proven wrong and inaccurate by others. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been known to publish numerous reputable reports that uphold the pro belief in global warming. For example, a report in 2007 declared that 55% of Holland is below sea level. After more inspections, it has been known that the numbers in this report were an exaggeration of over 100%. If this whole theory doesn’t seem fishy yet, also consider the 2007 report that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published. In the report, they relied on a 1999 news story in a popular science journal that was based on one interview with a little-known Indian scientist who said this was pure “speculation” not supported by any research. The claim was that the Himalayan glaciers are melting. The IPCC also misreported the supposed date of the glaciers’ meltdown as 2035. The Indian had suggested 2350. It is clear that those who are attempting to combat climate change are not doing it in the most factual manner. They are many fallacies in their arguments, which have been debunked. It is time to question whether we should place all of our trust into these “credible” sources, and whether or not global warming is even justifiable.
Furthermore, most of the scientific evidence used to back up the existence of global warming are bias and purposefully used as various propaganda. For example, the IPCC report that global warming is going to kill 40% Of the Amazon rainforest and cut African crop yields 50% has been found to be alarmist propaganda. The truth about climate patterns is not given by this “scientific data” that scientists use to get their point across. There was another report that was conducted by the British Antarctica Survey in 2009 that stated that the sea ice cap of Antarctica has been expanding by 100,000 square kilometers a decade for 30 years. That translates into 3,800 square miles of new Antarctic ice every year. While we always hear about the Arctic ice cap, we hear almost nothing of this report. This is a clear example of explicit use of propaganda and simply scare tactics. The mainstream media is misinforming the public by exaggerating the magnitude of global warming. Also, the popular media and public often confuse global warming with ozone depletion, the destruction of stratospheric ozone by chlorofluorocarbons. Reduced stratospheric ozone has actually had a cooling influence on surface temperatures, and increased tropospheric ozone has had a somewhat larger warming effect. However, some have attempted to persuade people that global warming is depleting our ozone, as if it is the reason why our planet is warming. The relationship between these two concepts are not strong. Consequently, we should not rely on the publicized false claims that misrepresent global warming, nor should we take any significant action.
Lastly, the proposed steps that are being encouraged to the general public in order to combat climate change are very unnecessary and simply a hindrance towards humanity. According to Wynes, co-author of a new study in the journal Environmental Research Letters, the four actions that “create the most bang for your emissions-reducing buck are ones most of us avoid: having fewer children; living without a car; avoiding transatlantic flights; and eating a plant-based (mostly vegetarian) diet”. Environmentalists believe that doing these meager tasks would significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions and save the planet! This would sound great if it actually worked. Anyways, would anyone actually be willing to sacrifice these everyday pleasures just for the sake of supposedly ‘helping’ the environment? Without sufficient evidence that global warming is even existing, all of these encouraged ideas that are being pushed by global warming activists seem pretty disruptive to the daily lives of innocent people who hold little responsibility for the change in natural climate patterns. How much of an impact do individuals really bring to the entire planet? Until we hear more logical methods of reducing carbon emissions and what not, we should not be afraid that the environment will degenerate. These environmentalist maniacs should not have any impact on any innocent individual, it’s foolish to trust and actually follow these self-proclaimed scientists.
To sum up, the legitimacy of global warming is very unconvincing; no further actions involving climate change are necessary. Even though global warming is usually portrayed by the media as a dangerous problem affecting everyone, one should reconsider the validity of their news sources and speculate this issue. It is common for the public to jump to conclusions too fast as they are being brainwashed to believing what society wants them to think. There are other meaningful global issues we are currently facing such as widespread diseases, terrorism, and the global financial crisis. In a global perspective, we should shift our focus away from global warming, as it would be more productive for humanity. As pointed out before, there are numerous instances that expose the flaws within this phenomenon called global warming.