Most of what climate scientists claim are facts are actually not. There are a ton of holes in current climate theory that raise legitimate questions not only about the current data (whether it is accurate, whether we have enough at enough distinct locations, effect of cities on data taken in previous agricultural regions, etc) but whether the models are at all reasonable. Further, no scientist has proven that CO2 is a genuine 'greenhouse gas', but rather the only *proven* science on warming sources point to solar-related phenomena and the seasonal variations related to the earth's rotation. Further, there is ample evidence that the earth has switched from warming and cooling periods many hundreds of times in it's history, with some switches relatively mild and as short as 50 years. All of that has basically been proven with current data that is deemed reliable by many.
Here is
an interview with Lord Monckton discussing his years-long research into the mathematics and a paper he is about to publish which severely criticizes specifically the upper bound of temperature differentiation proposed by some climate change theorists - he has stated that he has had two very renowned physicists/climate researchers review the work and he will be publishing soon and will provided to the British government for review.
I am not an evangelist for any side of the argument; rather I just want the truth and am waiting to do the applicable research to get there before panicking into any moves one way or the other. I think based on current evidence, there is not proof of man-made global warming though some data suggests we do adversely affect the environment in many ways. What is more clear to me is that we do pollute our environment quite heavily and this leads to very bad effects on wildlife, water, and our lands. However, I do not feel that man-made global warming or climate change has been shown nearly as conclusively as pollution damage has, and the current models, math, and methods need to be openly challenged with a chance to confirm or discredit.
There is still plenty of room for debate and discussion. What alarms me is the increasingly rampant militarized attitude of 'some' people who believe in man-made climate change who are wanting to criminalize not only certain industrial activity, but even the open debate on the topic which is the hallmark of our Constitutional principals. I think *that development* has been disturbing and shows that some will go to any means to have their way, regardless of the need for further research, debate, and decision making by all sides. In the end, only the truth about this topic will matter to whether we are truly damaging our world on the level some have proposed. Everything else will just end up as historical noise and wasted dollars/effort.
