I don`t know if you watched the documentary Foo but it is not saying anything about global polluting that is a very real issue. The point is that this whole environmental issue it seems needs better definition.
i.e. dumping pollutants in the oceans and highly toxic wastes in landfill and rivers is not anything to do with global warming yet important. Again destruction of habitats of animals is a separate but very real issue also.
The scientists in this documentary do not claim that Global Warming is not occurring but you will see that this warming and cooling has occurred over millenia on the earth.
There was also an ice-age cooling scare in the 70`s amazingly!
I found it interesting to to see that in medievil times the average temperatures were actually higher than they are now.
There are correlations with sun activity that fit better than the CO2 corelation in recent times.
Also relating when over long periods CO2 is looked at closer it seems the CO2 follows the temperature by up to 800 years and not the other way around anyway…
As for the war hungry leaders and corporations (the two are very close in recent times), this issue becomes more intriguing when you consider entities such as the Rockefeller Foundation, funding environmentalist groups. Why do the very interests who you would assume would love to propagandize anti-environmentalism have their fingers in the pie of the environmental movement?
Separating to our governments now you can see the use of the environmental movement to encourage such things as a carbon tax, micromanagement of individuals lives etc. A great way for governments to keep greater control of people is to promote scarcity. Again however important to distinguish between CO2 and other issues as the CO2 tax may be completely unnecessary but other environmental considerations more reasonable.
Addressing the Indonesia issue, I would be interested to see what the evidence that:
This was due to global warming. If so were there more tsunamis in hotter times in the past and less in cooler? Am going to have a look into this now myself as it is not an area I have looked into but if you have any leads it would be appreciated. (EDIT: also applying to Katrina.)
Also is the frog issue you are talking about due to direct warming, habitat destruction, or combination?
If it is habitat destruction then yes we would undoubtedly be responsible if human destruction is shown. If due to warming the evidence does not seem to be conclusive that we are, this of course then applies to tsunami creation, if global warming is said to be the sole cause.
I am very open to further views and research on all these things.
Will have a look at this, parts of it are covered in the documentary I linked but would like to see it first hand also.
From what I can tell, this shouldn`t be a fake. It was aired by a mainstream terrestrial station in the UK, though I admit that is certainly no gaurantee of anything
. It seems to be an airing of the alternative view on global warming and yes it certainly has given me food for thought also! ![]()
Short of the nukes it certainly seems debatable yet ![]()