Friday, September 16th 2011, 2:31 AM EDT
As with most climate change articles it must be stressed that this writer does not believe climate change is made up.
The 'green' lobbyists have been queuing up for decades by telling writers that they are 'wrong' about climate change and in fact it is human induced. There are all sorts of facts flying around, telling people that they are 'wrong' and do not understand what is happening to the planet. The earth is warming but the causes can't be solely blamed on humans.
For somebody who has read History at university, what is clear is that questions must be asked, writers should not be afraid to ask them and the past is fundamental to the issue of human induced climate change. If we ask the question, without being interrupted, we can begin to expose the over exaggerations of human induced climate change. If we take the two examples of the Ice Age and the Dinosaur Age, what were the causes of climate change in those cases? Humans?
Sure we can blame humans for many things in this world but even for climate change lobbyists, claiming human responsibilty for the destruction of the dinosaurs, would be stretching it. This issue has been scooted over many times by scientists. More people would be able to trust and be less sceptical of the causes of climate change if tough questions were answered. It is too easy to say you don't 'understand' the science behind the changes or humans are greedy and don't want to change...
...The earth's temperature and CO2 levels have varied widely throughout Earth's cyclical patterns of 100,000-year-long ice-ages and 10,000 year-long inter-glacial warming periods. Scientists would have to accept that the Earth is currently peaking in an inter-glacial warming period, before it will, inevitably, enter the next 100,000-year ice age. It is natural to expect warming during this period. Again, the earth is warming no doubt but is it in fact natural? Again, another question climate change lobbyists have refused to deal with over the years.
The historical record shows that temperature changes have actually preceded C02 changes. C02 therefore cannot be a primary consequence of global warming, or else they would have preceded temperature changes right? Would it be outside of the box to suggest that such evidence would appear to indicate that global warming might actually cause changes in C02 levels, therefore indicating CO2 levels cannot be wholly attributed to human-activities....
.....Clearly what needs to be explained to sceptics is why scientists have for a number of years dodged the serious questions. Nature is a huge part of global warming but we hear very little on this issue. What needs to happen is a new initiative to answer and address the key questions so that the world can move together as one. Climate change is serious and can only be addressed properly when the difficult questions are answered.
Click source to read FULL report from Thomas Costello