The default response of conservatives seems to be one of ignoring scientific facts simply because global warming appears to be an issue taken on primarily by liberals (and if they don’t fight the liberals at every turn on every issue, they may lose an election in the future, as if that was the end of the world). I think it is highly ignorant of many fellow conservatives to have such a bias that you cast aside scientific data and facts for the sake of political lines. Can we be reasonable together for once? The actual debate in the scientific world over global warming (where it actually matters) has nothing to do with whether or not the Earth itself is warming. The facts are indisputable: the Earth is warming (Read this Senate testimonial from the Director of the National Climatic Data Center, if you want facts; his understanding based on actual numbers is that global warming is caused by both natural occurrences as well as man’s influence). The average global temperature is on an upward trend, and according to computer models, it will continue to increase this century based on many variables input into the equations that calculate these models. No reasonable, scholarly scientist debates whether or not the atmosphere is warming: it is in fact warming, based on mathematical calculations that are indisputable.


But here’s the real question of the debate that not every scientist agrees on: is global warming being caused by man or is it a natural occurrence beyond the realm of our control (that is beyond the realm of being able to do anything about it), or is it both? The debate is not about IF the Earth is warming, but whether or not man is causing the warming through the emission of green-house gases (CO, CO2 and CH4). And I for one, along with many other scientists, including officials at the National Weather Service (what I would deem to be a very reliable source), do not believe man is causing the warming trend as many suppose. Some of them dispute that, however there are many who do not. Is it a mere coincidence all the planets in our solar system are increasing in temperature at around the same pace as the Earth (article)? Hmm, could it be the sun has increased its energy output at a greater rate than anytime in the past 1000 years, thus causing warmer temperatures here as well as on venus, mars, jupiter and all the other planets? Could that be causing a majority of the warming? Seems reasonable to me. And if that’s the case, what in the world are we going to do about it by passing Senate bills that make global warming a national security issue?

Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with reducing pollution through progressive infrastructure changes (world-wide, not just in the U.S.), but that will take some time to migrate everyone off of the current systems we have in place (you cannot do this overnight, or even in a few years). I don’t like breathing in toxic fumes everyday, nor does my asthmatic wife. So please, if we can reduce pollution, by all means, do it. My issue with the global warming craze though is the rashness of it all. In the twinkling of an eye, major companies, government officials, and others in our society are going green at every turn (what that even means as to how “going green” creates effective changes in the atmosphere, how there is a direct correlation to global warming, I have no idea). This just sounds like a marketing ploy to me to get you to buy their products, or vote for them, which is highly deceitful in my opinion.


Global warming is happening, but man may only be contributing to a very small percentage of the actual change in the global temperature. Should we stop polluting? Sure. But how are we going to create effective change at the industrial level, the place it matters the most for the global atmosphere? But even then, total green house gases (CO, CO2 and CH4) account for only 2% of the total of atmospheric gases. And of that, man is contributing a very small amount (something like 2% from what I’ve heard). So instead of being so rash and going from one extreme to another, maybe we should allocate most of our time, money and resources to preventing some of the catastrophes that may result from the indisputable rising temperatures instead of limiting any and everything within our infrastructure that makes our society run. “Going green” in every sector of the economy does not seem very effective. This is the natural tendency of man, to swing from one extreme to another. Again, hear me out in case you missed my position (because that seems to happen to almost every conservative I speak with about this): the Earth IS warming, but man IS PROBABLY NOT causing a majority of it.