Human Factor In Climate Warming? 

By Ron Parker

Even before the official calendar day of winter, many parts of our nation witnessed unusual weather - ice rain, excessive snowfall and unprecedented cold snaps dominated the media airwaves.

These stormy phenomenon's, along with historical events and archeology findings, are leading many scientists to question the global warming theory and if human beings are the true culprits contributing to the worldwide temperature changes.

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and his United Nations cohorts, the UN IPCC, seem to be losing worldwide support in their efforts to push UN negotiations that will lead to a new agreement replacing the Kyoto Protocol Treaty (a UN policy which ineffectively attempted to stop industrial nations from polluting the upper atmosphere) which expires later this year.

A new updated U.S. Senate Minority Report listed over 650 international scientists - many which are presently serving, or have served on the UN IPCC - which are now disputing the theory that the human element is the main contributor to the global warming phenomenon. 

 

The dissenting scientists are now more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authorized the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for UN policymakers.

Al Gore and his climate change cronies aren't just losing support in the scientific communities. It appears that there is reluctance growing among the worldwide citizenry. 

The findings of a survey conducted by the financial institution HSBC and environmental groups in 11 different countries revealed that of the 12,000 citizens interviewed, less than half - 47 percent - said they were prepared to make personal lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions.  The support for the global warming movement was down from 58 per cent last year.

Most Americans support efforts to clean up the air they breathe, the water they drink and the environment. However, most of the solutions to the climate change problems being proposed by Al Gore, his friends in the UN, environmental groups and some state and federal legislators are theory based and not proven science related. Not only does such lack of credibility umbrella their proposals, but if most were mandated, the average citizen's lifestyle would not only see magnificent change, but poverty would become increasingly evident worldwide.

Question comes to mind, if it is becoming more evident that the human factor should be ruled out as the main cause of the climate warming theory, why does our President-Elect, a number of state governors and legislators and UN bureaucrats embrace such a concept?
The answers stem around the possibility of collecting exorbitant amounts of revenue and government control - or tyranny.  Most proposals to stop climate change would be costly. Not only would tax increases be needed to fund the proposals, but increased energy, food and transportation costs would induce unnecessary financial hardship on the middle and lower class families of the nation. 

Not only would the average family be adversely affected, but the national economy and the free enterprise concept that is one of the major pillars of our Free Republic would also be jeopardized. Financial impacts on families would have a downward spiral affect on local and state economies, resulting in federal government handouts, with strings attached, leading to more federal control over state and local governments and our personal lives. Similar to the attempts being made by what bureaucrats claim are needed today to bail out banks, auto companies and other cooperate institutes.

Wind power, electric cars for family transportation, solar powered electricity and all those proposals that will cut down on pollutants are all great ideas. But the reality is, many of these alternate energy sources need a lot of costly research and those already developed are presently out of the financial reach of most families.