carrimini.com

As we go about our daily lives we seldom think how the way that we live affects the environment around us. While we may think for a few minutes that we need to be more environmentally conscious there are very few of us who actually take the time which is needed. The different reports about global warming need our consideration as some of the causes of global warming are caused by us.

Article Tags:
Global Warm

There is a lot of uncertainty in the world today. From the recent events in Egypt and other parts of the Middle East to the struggling job markets around the world. In a society that is currently very dependent on oil, the last thing we need to add to our problems is the rising cost of gasoline. We are all very aware of this price, and most of us realize the non-monetary benefits of moving toward a different source of fuel. But have you put much thought into considering other ways to get these “green” benefits – such as using a source of green energy for your home?

Energy companies are beginning to provide options that allow you to offset your carbon footprint by opting into more eco-friendly programs. These programs are generally fairly close in price to the standard options, though they do come at a small premium. However, if you are hoping to see other sources of energy move their way up the ladder and become more widely available, it will be worth the small cost to ensure the research continues. When demand grows and people request these green options, they will become more widely available as energy companies move to meet demands.

As it becomes more mainstream, research will be continuing that will allow green energy sources to also become more efficient. From there, the local energy companies will be able to provide green power on a much larger scale and this increase in efficiency will allow them to provide it at a lower cost as not only to the environment but also to your pocket book.

Green Mountain Energy is one of the few companies that is completely dedicated to this mission, but I suspect that if the consumer market continues to show that demand is growing the energy providers will begin to respond en masse by not only allowing you to purchase RECs or opting for a slight increase on your monthly bill to allow for increased green production but by starting to actually move towards producing green energy in larger quantity. One day, I believe we can actually see energy providers around the world that have the sole purpose of making renewable options available to consumer households as well as businesses.

If you agree that this is a vision worth pursuing then I strongly urge you to investigate what alternative energy options may be available in your area. If you find something suitable, show your support by jumping on-board. If nothing suitable is available in your area, perhaps you could make a few phone calls or write a few letters/emails?

Carbon Neutral Business A Viable Solution To Reduce Global Warming

One of the greatest threats faced by the world today is the rising global temperature. There are many factors, which contribute to global warming. If we ignore these problems, we could have serious ecological problems like the rising of the oceans due to the melting of the ice caps or the disturbance of many fragile ecosystems that rely on a carefully moderated temperature.

However, we can help minimize the increasing temperature and help in finding global warming solution by adopting some effective measures like becoming a part of the Carbon Neutral Business movement. With this movement and the drive to reduce such harmful toxins like carbon from continuing to pollute our air we can have cleaner air and a safer environment to live in. The work of the people who run this organization specifically targets companies that are known to emit so much greenhouse emissions and teaches these companies how they can be of help to the environment without really cutting back on production as well as revenues. So how can we achieve carbon neutrality? There are four main areas to look at: Limiting transport energy usage and emissions (walking, using bicycles or public transport, avoiding flying, using low-energy vehicles). Nowadays a business’s attitude and actions towards climate change determine its public awareness and success. Many companies are coming forward to help minimize these effects instead of adding to them. We can solve this problem by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide emissions emitted by our cars and factories, carpooling, using bikes and developing alternative fuel sources could reduce these emissions on the personal level.

The tools and the information that the Carbon Neutral Business movement gets to the people who need to reduce the pollutants that they emit. You can then proceed to reduce these emissions with the information you can get from the people who run this movement and from those who are concerned about our environment and the air we breathe. Going carbon neutral is also a immense viable advantage over those companies who are not carbon Neutral because now a days consumers, Customers are more and more aware and concern about climate change and its effects. As the public becomes more aware of the need for immediate action against climate change, your carbon neutral business will gain competitive advantages within the low-carbon economy and benefit from being part of the solution.

This will be a small step taken by your organization to take on active direction role in the battle against climate change.

There is a lot of uncertainty in the world today. From the recent events in Egypt and other parts of the Middle East to the struggling job markets around the world. In a society that is currently very dependent on oil, the last thing we need to add to our problems is the rising cost of gasoline. We are all very aware of this price, and most of us realize the non-monetary benefits of moving toward a different source of fuel. But have you put much thought into considering other ways to get these “green” benefits – such as using a source of green energy for your home?

Energy companies are beginning to provide options that allow you to offset your carbon footprint by opting into more eco-friendly programs. These programs are generally fairly close in price to the standard options, though they do come at a small premium. However, if you are hoping to see other sources of energy move their way up the ladder and become more widely available, it will be worth the small cost to ensure the research continues. When demand grows and people request these green options, they will become more widely available as energy companies move to meet demands.

As it becomes more mainstream, research will be continuing that will allow green energy sources to also become more efficient. From there, the local energy companies will be able to provide green power on a much larger scale and this increase in efficiency will allow them to provide it at a lower cost as not only to the environment but also to your pocket book.

Green Mountain Energy is one of the few companies that is completely dedicated to this mission, but I suspect that if the consumer market continues to show that demand is growing the energy providers will begin to respond en masse by not only allowing you to purchase RECs or opting for a slight increase on your monthly bill to allow for increased green production but by starting to actually move towards producing green energy in larger quantity. One day, I believe we can actually see energy providers around the world that have the sole purpose of making renewable options available to consumer households as well as businesses.

If you agree that this is a vision worth pursuing then I strongly urge you to investigate what alternative energy options may be available in your area. If you find something suitable, show your support by jumping on-board. If nothing suitable is available in your area, perhaps you could make a few phone calls or write a few letters/emails?

A lot of people have watched the Inconvenient truth by “ex next president” Al Gore. There certanily are some facts and photos that make you think, but is global warming really happening the way that Gore describes it ? There have been many theories against the usual theory that is leaning on the green house. The theories talk about solar activity and that carbon dioxide is acctualy rising and falling due to temperatures happening 800 years before. The product that came out of counter theories is The Great Global Warming Swindle a movie that is worth watching, just to see what people that don’t agree with Al Gore think about the movie.

One of the contradictions that is being made in movie is that the usual global warming theory predicts higher increasing of the temperature in the troposphere than on the ground, but the researches (satellite and weather balloon ) have shown that this claim is wrong. As mentioned before one of the strongest theory that is proven with graphs is that increases of carbon dioxide are lagged behind the temperature for about 800 years. That means that high percentage of carbon dioxide in the air is acctualy the consequence of high temperatures in 13th century. In the documentary the scientists are also saying that Carbon dioxide only represents 0.054% of all the gasses in the atmosphere and that humans are only responsible for 1% of those 0.054%, which can’t be enough for global warming. A very strong claim is also that Solar activity is currently at a very high level, and that Solar activity has a big impact on temperature changes, they even backup this saying with a scientist that has earned a lot of money betting on the weather.

There are many theoris that talk for and against global warming. Even though global warming might not be caused by carbon dioxide emissions we should still take care of a super high pollution and switch to natural resources.

Taking advantage of the Green Card Lottery program is perhaps the best way to get into America. After all, this is Americas way of giving people equal chances to become permanent residents of the United States. However, because of the complex and somewhat difficult process involved in acquiring a Green Card, many people are easily confounded with the procedures involved with getting a visa. And this results to misconceptions about Green Card lottery. Obviously, it is best to know what these misconceptions are, since many scrupulous individuals use the ignorance of people to their advantage. Here are some misconceptions about the Green Card lotteryproperly known as the Diversity Immigrant Visaand the truths behind them.

Everyone can qualifyMajority can qualify for the Green Card lottery; except for natives of certain countries. As of now, these countries include Mainland China, Brazil, India, Mexico, Pakistan, Philippines, Korea, United Kingdom, and Vietnam, among others. Natives of these countries can still apply for permanent residence, although in different programs and qualifications; their inclusion in the list does not mean they are banned from residing in the country. However, these countries have high rates of American immigration. The Green Card lottery program is reserved for natives of countries with low rates of immigration to the United States, perhaps a ways of encouraging immigration through the proper means. And as its proper name implies, this process makes sure that the immigrants in the American are not limited to the countries that are not qualified for the Diversity Immigrant Visa program.

Winning the lottery instantly awards one a visaIn case an immigrant wins in the Green Card lottery, he or she isnt automatically awarded a visa. As the guidelines for the Diversity Immigrant Visa say, winning the lottery gives one the chance to get a Green Cardthe winner would still have to submit numerous forms and documents that should approved by the American government before the Green Card will be awarded. The lottery merely gives the immigrant a chance, but one still has to pass the requirements of the US government in order to be allowed to legally reside in America.

The Green Card lottery would cost moneyAssistance for Green Card lottery application would require payment, but the actual application and submission for the lottery itself are free of charge. Again, remember that the Green Card lottery itself does not guarantee that one would receive a visa even if he or she wins one of the 55,000 possible visas. In line with this, assistance for Green Card lottery isnt illegal, although there are a number of fraudulent parties who use this as an excuse to trick people. Others require help with their applications because Green Card lottery is admittedly a complex procedure, and anyone not used to Green Card applications could use all the help they can get.

Although the Green Card application is free of charge, it is still best know about its basics. Read the guidelines of Green Card lottery or get assistance when absolutely necessary.

Writer: Darren Ng Research Paper Global Warming Crisis Global warming is one, if not the most discussed concerns of our contemporary society. In fact, it has engendered protracted debates between and among our top scientists, whose differing theories seek to unravel not only the real causes but also certain viable solutions which can be framed to address it. If only to cite, two schools of thought emerge from these heated discussions. On the one side of the spectrum, one group of scientist-thinkers claims that the rapid increase of carbon dioxide emission, owing much from the exponential growth of industries of the post war era, is the chief cause of the present global warming crisis. By contrast, another group that which strongly disagrees with the aforesaid stance maintains that global warming is not really attributable to an increased carbon dioxide emission as it is to due to the inevitability of the earths natural processes of cyclic heating and cooling within a given span of time. Thus, while it is agreed that the globe is in fact warming, I believe carbon dioxide is not the underlying reason behind it. This paper makes a case for the necessity of continuing studies as regards to the matter, as I am more inclined to believe that, based on my readings, carbon dioxide emission does not constitute the real cause of global warming, if by cause we take to mean that the increased production of carbon dioxide acts as the sufficient explanation of global warming, let alone its sole mitigating factor. The stance which this paper takes is a somewhat critical to the more popular understanding of global warming crisis; i.e. this paper is specifically critical to Al Gore, along with some 2,500 scientist who work at the IPCC (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and roughly about 86% of American citizens, who summarily hold that global warming is a problem brought about by human doing. This paper seeks to underscore the incurable ambiguities which mark the contention that global warming is entirely due to the increased incidence of greenhouse concentrations, which in itself is nothing but the consequential result of the perceived increase of carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon Dioxide Emission as Causative Ingredient to Global Warming? As previously mentioned, there are many scientists who claim that the current state of the industrial societies is a key determining factor that aggravates the noticeable increase of world atmospheric and marine temperatures. Crucial to this is to cite that world economies heavy dependence on fossil fuels, which in turn leads to excessive carbon dioxide emission, is responsible for the increased incidence of greenhouse effect being experienced the world over. For instance, Homer-Dixon, the author of the book The upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization he cites that concentration of greenhouse gases are increasing fast and the earth is getting hotter (Homer-Dixon 162). And it, in fact, is not hard to establish that there is a direct correlation existing between the increasing world temperature and the equally rapid increase of carbon dioxide emission recorded in as many years. One only needs to show that many studies, such as the one published by the Environmental Protection Agency, rely on arguing the fact that carbon dioxide discharge and the worlds atmospheric temperatures have risen by over 35% since the rise of Industrialization so to make a convenient conclusion that it is the primary cause of global warming(Carbon Dioxide, 2008). The EPAs argument is relevant in the discussion since it brings into the fore the tendency of many organizations to take carbon dioxide and global warming under the lenses of cause-effect model. In many respects, this is likewise the crux of the arguments espoused by the Kyoto Protocol an international environmental accord sanctioned by the United Nations, aimed at decreasing world production of greenhouse gases. According to the agreement, world governments acceding to such an accord must ensure that steps are undertaken to cut their respective carbon dioxide emissions below the range which can be devastating to nature (Kyoto Protocol). This, moreover, is also the assumption of those who are advocating the use of nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels. According to Max Schulz who is the writer of the article Nuclear Power, explains that the world needs to discover viable sources of energy through clean technology without pollution or greenhouse gas emissions (Schulz 90). Herein, it would be necessary to note that the reasoned premise of the Kyoto Protocol and arguments for nuclear power rests on the plain assumption that there exists a direct cause-and-effect correlation between carbon dioxide production and rapid increase of world atmospheric temperatures. Which is why, these arguments tend to regard global warming as anthropogenic in essence i.e., it is a phenomenon brought about by human doing. That having said, there are still reasons to think that no one can really stop the continued warming of the world. Not even the Kyoto Protocol an already massive initiative, to say the least, taken by humanity to address the problem dares to dream of averting the rise of world temperatures all together. As indeed, our optimum technologies nowadays have yet to frame adequate solutions to curb the rate of global warming. If this perceived helplessness in respect to global warming speaks of anything about our present situation, it merely proves that there is more into the problem than merely attributing it to human doing. This is because if global warming is really a problem constituted by human fault, then it is with human initiatives that such problem can and must be remedied. Apparently however, human progress cannot be blamed for the recent rising trends of global temperatures. Global Warming as the Earths Natural Way of Being

google_ad_channel = “7940249670, ” + AB_cat_channel + AB_unit_channel;
google_language = “en”;
google_ad_region = ‘test’;

While it may be easy to establish the correlation between the amounts of carbon dioxide emitted in the last 50 years and the rise of world temperatures, it is nevertheless difficult to construe a necessary cause-and-effect connection between them. For say that carbon dioxide alone is the sufficient explanation to global warming means that we are reducing the problem into a single cause; and this must not be so. In Homer-Dixons book he cites a quote from Michel Jarraud who is the secretary general of the United Nations World Meteorological Organization. Michael Jarraud contends, You cannot attribute (global warming) to a single cause. Its about the very complex interaction between all the elements that make up the very complex machine that is the EarthBut global warming is likely to lead to more frequent extraordinary events and greater intensity of these events (Homer-Dixon 162). In the first place, global warming should be seen as a natural process or occurrence, or a phenomenon not generated by human activities. In fact, global warming happens periodically; as this was proven by Petr Chylek who is the Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science. For instance, in his report, he maintains that during the 1920s, Greenlands temperature was recorded higher than it was during many instances 2005. With such telling evidence, he concludes that, the Greenland warming of 1920 to 1930 demonstrates that a high concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not a necessary condition for period of warming to arise (Chylek). The same may be said of the trend which shows that during the period of 1900-1940, the temperatures were rising even when industrialization was not as massive compare to what we have now. After this era, the Post-War economic boom was to commence. Ironically, this was the period when the temperature dropped and did not begin to rise until four decades later. Besides, one must also note with care that the past 150 years have seen a very minute increase in world temperature only half a degree Celsius. If with the massive production of carbon dioxide the rate of world temperature increase does not appear to be so drastic, then it is evident that carbon dioxide is not the sole cause of global warming. Secondly, where carbon dioxide is in question, it is certainly insightful to note that human activities do not really generate as much carbon dioxide emission as does nature itself, when it produces the carbon dioxide in manner being more significant, if not undeniably massive. This is certainly an interesting angle to look at; for while we agree to a certain respect that carbon dioxide is a heat-generating compound in the atmosphere, it nevertheless is just one of the many gaseous compounds comprising greenhouse gases. As such, carbon dioxide comprises a meager 0.97% of the total greenhouse gasses present in the air (USA TODAY). Moreover, human activities are not to sole progenitor of carbon dioxide. The earths land surface, it must be noted, emits carbon dioxide as well. For instance, when a volcanic eruption occurs, the earth produces more carbon dioxide than the amount produced by industrial factories around the world, and certainly more than the amount of the same emitted by human beings. This is to speak only of the earths terrestrial surface, which is roughly about 30% of the worlds surface area. The largest emitter of carbon dioxide is by the larger marine surface, as it makes up the remaining 70% of our worlds geographical composition. Thus, humanity must not be the one to be blamed for the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere right now. Besides, on account of the fact that carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is insignificant, there is a truth in saying that carbon is not the sole reason that explains global warming. Thirdly, not only must people start to realize that global warming is a phenomenon that happens on a natural basis, they too must take into careful account the significant role which solar radiation plays in ushering the world into another phase of warmer temperatures. In other words, the warming of the earth is in fact believed to be caused by the sun. This is exactly the contention leveled by Jeffrey Gordon in his book called Solar Energy: The State of the Art. He contends that solar energy acts as the major contributor to the warming of the earth. This is because he believes that urban temperature and the sky view manifest a direct correlation (Gordon 14). To briefly explain, Gordon believes that cloud formation in the sky is influenced by the amount of solar radiation being emitted by the sun. Ordinarily, we speak of cloud formation as a phenomenon explicable by the rate of evaporation and condensation of water vapor transpiring in the earths atmosphere (The World Book Encyclopedia 111). But, Gordon believes that cosmic rays are the actual reason behind the formation of clouds i.e., sun rays play a role in the formation of clouds. Therefore, if clouds are generated by cosmic rays, and that they absorb and reflect solar radiation, which in turn make the earths surface cool or warm according to the cloud density, then it is with good reasons to claim that global warming is indeed caused by natural processes and not by human doing. Still, there is a need to further underscore the fact that many doomsday prophecies in respect to the true state of the earth appear to be patently exaggerated, if not wholly unfounded as well. A glaring example would be to cite how scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came up with analyses and reports accentuating the correlation between the earths temperatures on the one hand and the levels of carbon dioxide on the other hand. This, we might as well be reminded, is in itself an indication of correlation but not of necessary connection, as argued hereinabove. Unfortunately, these scientists argued that, using the temperature-carbon dioxide correlation, the warming globe would be a precursor to a significant rise in sea levels within the next one hundred years. And by further claiming that sea levels are expected to rise at least twenty feet above the present level, these scientist warn of extensive flooding, reduction of earths land surface, and all sorts of natural disasters. We need to point out, however, that this claim is at the very least preposterous. This is for the plain reason that, according to the recent studies shown in a BBC documentary called The Global Warming Swindle, it would take another 1000 years to have our sea level to rise dramatically by twenty feet, or less (Scott). Hardly over, another example pertinent to some scientists tendency to proffer unfounded studies comes through research by Thomas Knutson of the NOAAs Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. According to him, a greenhouse gas-induced warming may lead to a gradually increasing risk in the occurrence of highly destructive category-5 storms (Knutson 16). Another scientist from the IPCC agrees with Knutson, and even further researched on this case and concluded that we are on the way to another ice age. Once again, the extremities palpable in their conclusions make their claims highly dubitable. At the very least, we need to inquire why scientists arrive at differing conclusions i.e., one speaks of catastrophic hurricanes, yet another prophesies a looming ice-age using the same climate model as evidence. We have reasons to believe that these scientists have deliberately pushed their interpretation beyond what their evidences imply. And reason behind this, we might as well surmise, lies in the need to attract the public attention at the expense of portraying the truth of the matter regarding the state of our nature. Providing evidence for this case, the authors J. Timmons Roberts and Bradley C. Parks in their book, A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North-South Politics, and Climate Policy would most likely support my case. Roberts and Parks cite that, Though it would be impossible to say that any single hurricane was caused by global warming, the increase in air and water temperatures has undoubtedly increased the evaporation and energy in the climate system. This phrase is so significant because it disproves that global warming is the trigger towards storms. It also shows that the increasing carbon dioxide has no correlation towards rising temperature, inasmuch as it is mainly evaporation and energy that affect climate. Finally, it is imperative to note that many scientists tendency to lopsidedly zero in on construing doomsday leaves no room for appreciating the positive ramifications of global warming. During the course of my research, I realized that there are those who say that a warmer globe does not necessarily spell doom for humanity. On the contrary, it may even be beneficial for us. Bruce E. Johansen in his book The Global Warming: Desk Reference for instance contends, a slight rise in temperatures and carbon dioxide levels would stimulate the growth of many plants (Johansen 105). This is because the plants will more largely absorb carbon dioxide when there is more of it. Moreover, this proves that the earths natural cycle is on course, and that there is no need to unnecessarily incite panic from among the greater public. The earth will learn and adapt to climate changes as much as humans, and every other animal, would. With the evidence from many studies from authors such as John Christian, Roy Spencer and many listed above, I confidently believe that carbon dioxide is not the reason behind global warming. Maybe our media is so influenced by our political leaders today that many of us follow behind them into believing that carbon dioxide is causing the warming of the earth. Why do they want us to believe this? My theory is when politics wants to be involved in any issue; their main concern is to search for benefits. So what is the solution behind global warming? There may seem like there is no solution but ultimately the solution is for the selfish to become unselfish for the selfish reason. If carbon dioxide is the real cause of global warming, our governments should use more of their money to create better ways of transportation rather than gain income from the warming. Transportation infrastructure includes more biking routes, bus stops, underground trains etc. This is proven to work as European countries implement it into their infrastructure. Thus, if global warming is a natural cycle, then we cannot do anything but to use more of the governments income to invest in other ways of living as global warming comes closer each day. By way of conclusion, I wish to end with a thought which affirms the central roadmap and chief contention of this paper i.e., the debate about global warming cannot be laid to rest, so long as the entire truth about the matter is not fully unraveled. Right now, the world is fed with much-publicized but too-often-pessimistic views about the ill-effects of global warming. And much too often, these supposed scientific studies pin the blame on human beings and their otherwise magnificent activities and achievements. This, I believe, is rather unfair. In the discussions that were developed, it was seen that there is more into global warming than merely attributing it to carbon dioxide emissions of the last few decades, and the increased concentration of greenhouse gasses observed in the present times. In the final analysis, we have to admit that the earths climate has always been changing. And as we have been through cold and warm periods, we must appreciate the fact that nearly all living species have found, in ways more than one, their respective ways of surviving. Certainly, the debate is far from being over.

The Matcha green tea powder is made with a type of tea named matcha which is a type of green tea cultivate in Japan. I suggest to infuse this tea in a 176-185 F water for 30 seconds. It is usually drink during the day with nothing inside and it is usually drink hot.
Matcha green tea powder
to recap :
- quality: green – origin: Japan – degrees of water: 176 – 185F (80 – 85C) – time of infusion: 30 seconds – when: during the day – how: without anything, hot.
The Matcha green tea powder is made from the highest quality Japanee Gyokuro green tea and is generally employed within the standard Japanese tea ceremony. Encounter the Way of Tea or “Cha No Yu” as you may create a frothy bright green Matcha infusion. Matcha green tea powder includes extremely concentrated green tea antioxidants, vitamins, minerals, chlorophyll and the one of a kind L-theanine amino acids found almost exclusively in green tea. Deep and concentrated, this special green tea motivates attention and calm. It helps against influenza.

google_ad_channel = “7940249670, ” + AB_cat_channel + AB_unit_channel;
google_language = “en”;
google_ad_region = ‘test’;

You can actually use the Matcha green tea powder with water or milk, with the last one you could produce a terrific and tasty Matcha frappuccino which gave six to eight hours of natural energy without any coffee or additives. A container of organic matcha price $40, really expensive but it gives you energy and made your day lighter you could use it as a pre-workout drink, it had properties to elevate mood, lower cholesterol, maintain blood sugar stable, and enhance a calm alertness for far better focus.
Several guidelines on brewing matcha green tea powder, the very first factor you’ve got to do is to pre heat a bowl with hot water until the bowl is warm then get rid of the water and dry then add 1/4 tsp to the bowl, when you want a thicker brew, I suggest you to add more than a quater as I stated above you’ve got to add a 165-175 deg F cup of hot water. Now you might have to rinse a whisk and vigorously whisk to the tea and water until it becomes frothy, you ought to have what looks to be a bowl of algae.
In the event you want much better result you’ve got to follow these advices, as an example in case you use a spoon as an alternative to a whisk you won’t have the identical results, you should have a good filtered water, it such an significant factor! Never boil the water if it occurs I suggest you to restart the method, we need to follow strictly the directions to have a great green tea.
So what you are waiting for? try the matcha green tea powder now!

Writer: Darren Ng Research Paper Global Warming Crisis Global warming is one, if not the most discussed concerns of our contemporary society. In fact, it has engendered protracted debates between and among our top scientists, whose differing theories seek to unravel not only the real causes but also certain viable solutions which can be framed to address it. If only to cite, two schools of thought emerge from these heated discussions. On the one side of the spectrum, one group of scientist-thinkers claims that the rapid increase of carbon dioxide emission, owing much from the exponential growth of industries of the post war era, is the chief cause of the present global warming crisis. By contrast, another group that which strongly disagrees with the aforesaid stance maintains that global warming is not really attributable to an increased carbon dioxide emission as it is to due to the inevitability of the earths natural processes of cyclic heating and cooling within a given span of time. Thus, while it is agreed that the globe is in fact warming, I believe carbon dioxide is not the underlying reason behind it. This paper makes a case for the necessity of continuing studies as regards to the matter, as I am more inclined to believe that, based on my readings, carbon dioxide emission does not constitute the real cause of global warming, if by cause we take to mean that the increased production of carbon dioxide acts as the sufficient explanation of global warming, let alone its sole mitigating factor. The stance which this paper takes is a somewhat critical to the more popular understanding of global warming crisis; i.e. this paper is specifically critical to Al Gore, along with some 2,500 scientist who work at the IPCC (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and roughly about 86% of American citizens, who summarily hold that global warming is a problem brought about by human doing. This paper seeks to underscore the incurable ambiguities which mark the contention that global warming is entirely due to the increased incidence of greenhouse concentrations, which in itself is nothing but the consequential result of the perceived increase of carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon Dioxide Emission as Causative Ingredient to Global Warming? As previously mentioned, there are many scientists who claim that the current state of the industrial societies is a key determining factor that aggravates the noticeable increase of world atmospheric and marine temperatures. Crucial to this is to cite that world economies heavy dependence on fossil fuels, which in turn leads to excessive carbon dioxide emission, is responsible for the increased incidence of greenhouse effect being experienced the world over. For instance, Homer-Dixon, the author of the book The upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization he cites that concentration of greenhouse gases are increasing fast and the earth is getting hotter (Homer-Dixon 162). And it, in fact, is not hard to establish that there is a direct correlation existing between the increasing world temperature and the equally rapid increase of carbon dioxide emission recorded in as many years. One only needs to show that many studies, such as the one published by the Environmental Protection Agency, rely on arguing the fact that carbon dioxide discharge and the worlds atmospheric temperatures have risen by over 35% since the rise of Industrialization so to make a convenient conclusion that it is the primary cause of global warming(Carbon Dioxide, 2008). The EPAs argument is relevant in the discussion since it brings into the fore the tendency of many organizations to take carbon dioxide and global warming under the lenses of cause-effect model. In many respects, this is likewise the crux of the arguments espoused by the Kyoto Protocol an international environmental accord sanctioned by the United Nations, aimed at decreasing world production of greenhouse gases. According to the agreement, world governments acceding to such an accord must ensure that steps are undertaken to cut their respective carbon dioxide emissions below the range which can be devastating to nature (Kyoto Protocol). This, moreover, is also the assumption of those who are advocating the use of nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels. According to Max Schulz who is the writer of the article Nuclear Power, explains that the world needs to discover viable sources of energy through clean technology without pollution or greenhouse gas emissions (Schulz 90). Herein, it would be necessary to note that the reasoned premise of the Kyoto Protocol and arguments for nuclear power rests on the plain assumption that there exists a direct cause-and-effect correlation between carbon dioxide production and rapid increase of world atmospheric temperatures. Which is why, these arguments tend to regard global warming as anthropogenic in essence i.e., it is a phenomenon brought about by human doing. That having said, there are still reasons to think that no one can really stop the continued warming of the world. Not even the Kyoto Protocol an already massive initiative, to say the least, taken by humanity to address the problem dares to dream of averting the rise of world temperatures all together. As indeed, our optimum technologies nowadays have yet to frame adequate solutions to curb the rate of global warming. If this perceived helplessness in respect to global warming speaks of anything about our present situation, it merely proves that there is more into the problem than merely attributing it to human doing. This is because if global warming is really a problem constituted by human fault, then it is with human initiatives that such problem can and must be remedied. Apparently however, human progress cannot be blamed for the recent rising trends of global temperatures. Global Warming as the Earths Natural Way of Being

google_ad_channel = “7940249670, ” + AB_cat_channel + AB_unit_channel;
google_language = “en”;
google_ad_region = ‘test’;

While it may be easy to establish the correlation between the amounts of carbon dioxide emitted in the last 50 years and the rise of world temperatures, it is nevertheless difficult to construe a necessary cause-and-effect connection between them. For say that carbon dioxide alone is the sufficient explanation to global warming means that we are reducing the problem into a single cause; and this must not be so. In Homer-Dixons book he cites a quote from Michel Jarraud who is the secretary general of the United Nations World Meteorological Organization. Michael Jarraud contends, You cannot attribute (global warming) to a single cause. Its about the very complex interaction between all the elements that make up the very complex machine that is the EarthBut global warming is likely to lead to more frequent extraordinary events and greater intensity of these events (Homer-Dixon 162). In the first place, global warming should be seen as a natural process or occurrence, or a phenomenon not generated by human activities. In fact, global warming happens periodically; as this was proven by Petr Chylek who is the Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science. For instance, in his report, he maintains that during the 1920s, Greenlands temperature was recorded higher than it was during many instances 2005. With such telling evidence, he concludes that, the Greenland warming of 1920 to 1930 demonstrates that a high concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not a necessary condition for period of warming to arise (Chylek). The same may be said of the trend which shows that during the period of 1900-1940, the temperatures were rising even when industrialization was not as massive compare to what we have now. After this era, the Post-War economic boom was to commence. Ironically, this was the period when the temperature dropped and did not begin to rise until four decades later. Besides, one must also note with care that the past 150 years have seen a very minute increase in world temperature only half a degree Celsius. If with the massive production of carbon dioxide the rate of world temperature increase does not appear to be so drastic, then it is evident that carbon dioxide is not the sole cause of global warming. Secondly, where carbon dioxide is in question, it is certainly insightful to note that human activities do not really generate as much carbon dioxide emission as does nature itself, when it produces the carbon dioxide in manner being more significant, if not undeniably massive. This is certainly an interesting angle to look at; for while we agree to a certain respect that carbon dioxide is a heat-generating compound in the atmosphere, it nevertheless is just one of the many gaseous compounds comprising greenhouse gases. As such, carbon dioxide comprises a meager 0.97% of the total greenhouse gasses present in the air (USA TODAY). Moreover, human activities are not to sole progenitor of carbon dioxide. The earths land surface, it must be noted, emits carbon dioxide as well. For instance, when a volcanic eruption occurs, the earth produces more carbon dioxide than the amount produced by industrial factories around the world, and certainly more than the amount of the same emitted by human beings. This is to speak only of the earths terrestrial surface, which is roughly about 30% of the worlds surface area. The largest emitter of carbon dioxide is by the larger marine surface, as it makes up the remaining 70% of our worlds geographical composition. Thus, humanity must not be the one to be blamed for the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere right now. Besides, on account of the fact that carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is insignificant, there is a truth in saying that carbon is not the sole reason that explains global warming. Thirdly, not only must people start to realize that global warming is a phenomenon that happens on a natural basis, they too must take into careful account the significant role which solar radiation plays in ushering the world into another phase of warmer temperatures. In other words, the warming of the earth is in fact believed to be caused by the sun. This is exactly the contention leveled by Jeffrey Gordon in his book called Solar Energy: The State of the Art. He contends that solar energy acts as the major contributor to the warming of the earth. This is because he believes that urban temperature and the sky view manifest a direct correlation (Gordon 14). To briefly explain, Gordon believes that cloud formation in the sky is influenced by the amount of solar radiation being emitted by the sun. Ordinarily, we speak of cloud formation as a phenomenon explicable by the rate of evaporation and condensation of water vapor transpiring in the earths atmosphere (The World Book Encyclopedia 111). But, Gordon believes that cosmic rays are the actual reason behind the formation of clouds i.e., sun rays play a role in the formation of clouds. Therefore, if clouds are generated by cosmic rays, and that they absorb and reflect solar radiation, which in turn make the earths surface cool or warm according to the cloud density, then it is with good reasons to claim that global warming is indeed caused by natural processes and not by human doing. Still, there is a need to further underscore the fact that many doomsday prophecies in respect to the true state of the earth appear to be patently exaggerated, if not wholly unfounded as well. A glaring example would be to cite how scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came up with analyses and reports accentuating the correlation between the earths temperatures on the one hand and the levels of carbon dioxide on the other hand. This, we might as well be reminded, is in itself an indication of correlation but not of necessary connection, as argued hereinabove. Unfortunately, these scientists argued that, using the temperature-carbon dioxide correlation, the warming globe would be a precursor to a significant rise in sea levels within the next one hundred years. And by further claiming that sea levels are expected to rise at least twenty feet above the present level, these scientist warn of extensive flooding, reduction of earths land surface, and all sorts of natural disasters. We need to point out, however, that this claim is at the very least preposterous. This is for the plain reason that, according to the recent studies shown in a BBC documentary called The Global Warming Swindle, it would take another 1000 years to have our sea level to rise dramatically by twenty feet, or less (Scott). Hardly over, another example pertinent to some scientists tendency to proffer unfounded studies comes through research by Thomas Knutson of the NOAAs Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. According to him, a greenhouse gas-induced warming may lead to a gradually increasing risk in the occurrence of highly destructive category-5 storms (Knutson 16). Another scientist from the IPCC agrees with Knutson, and even further researched on this case and concluded that we are on the way to another ice age. Once again, the extremities palpable in their conclusions make their claims highly dubitable. At the very least, we need to inquire why scientists arrive at differing conclusions i.e., one speaks of catastrophic hurricanes, yet another prophesies a looming ice-age using the same climate model as evidence. We have reasons to believe that these scientists have deliberately pushed their interpretation beyond what their evidences imply. And reason behind this, we might as well surmise, lies in the need to attract the public attention at the expense of portraying the truth of the matter regarding the state of our nature. Providing evidence for this case, the authors J. Timmons Roberts and Bradley C. Parks in their book, A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North-South Politics, and Climate Policy would most likely support my case. Roberts and Parks cite that, Though it would be impossible to say that any single hurricane was caused by global warming, the increase in air and water temperatures has undoubtedly increased the evaporation and energy in the climate system. This phrase is so significant because it disproves that global warming is the trigger towards storms. It also shows that the increasing carbon dioxide has no correlation towards rising temperature, inasmuch as it is mainly evaporation and energy that affect climate. Finally, it is imperative to note that many scientists tendency to lopsidedly zero in on construing doomsday leaves no room for appreciating the positive ramifications of global warming. During the course of my research, I realized that there are those who say that a warmer globe does not necessarily spell doom for humanity. On the contrary, it may even be beneficial for us. Bruce E. Johansen in his book The Global Warming: Desk Reference for instance contends, a slight rise in temperatures and carbon dioxide levels would stimulate the growth of many plants (Johansen 105). This is because the plants will more largely absorb carbon dioxide when there is more of it. Moreover, this proves that the earths natural cycle is on course, and that there is no need to unnecessarily incite panic from among the greater public. The earth will learn and adapt to climate changes as much as humans, and every other animal, would. With the evidence from many studies from authors such as John Christian, Roy Spencer and many listed above, I confidently believe that carbon dioxide is not the reason behind global warming. Maybe our media is so influenced by our political leaders today that many of us follow behind them into believing that carbon dioxide is causing the warming of the earth. Why do they want us to believe this? My theory is when politics wants to be involved in any issue; their main concern is to search for benefits. So what is the solution behind global warming? There may seem like there is no solution but ultimately the solution is for the selfish to become unselfish for the selfish reason. If carbon dioxide is the real cause of global warming, our governments should use more of their money to create better ways of transportation rather than gain income from the warming. Transportation infrastructure includes more biking routes, bus stops, underground trains etc. This is proven to work as European countries implement it into their infrastructure. Thus, if global warming is a natural cycle, then we cannot do anything but to use more of the governments income to invest in other ways of living as global warming comes closer each day. By way of conclusion, I wish to end with a thought which affirms the central roadmap and chief contention of this paper i.e., the debate about global warming cannot be laid to rest, so long as the entire truth about the matter is not fully unraveled. Right now, the world is fed with much-publicized but too-often-pessimistic views about the ill-effects of global warming. And much too often, these supposed scientific studies pin the blame on human beings and their otherwise magnificent activities and achievements. This, I believe, is rather unfair. In the discussions that were developed, it was seen that there is more into global warming than merely attributing it to carbon dioxide emissions of the last few decades, and the increased concentration of greenhouse gasses observed in the present times. In the final analysis, we have to admit that the earths climate has always been changing. And as we have been through cold and warm periods, we must appreciate the fact that nearly all living species have found, in ways more than one, their respective ways of surviving. Certainly, the debate is far from being over.

Carbon Based Global Warming Is A Fraud! The Ruse At The Muse Exposed!

Not so long ago,I went to the London museum and look what I found. What you can see in the picture on the wall behind me is an illustration of how the average daily temperature of a given region of our planet has varied greatly over different time periods. Another one of many documented examples can be found in a reference to 11th century England during the reign of King Harold. It refers to a battle the King’s soldiers had against an army of invading Norwegian soldiers. Because the weather was so hot (and this medieval period has been well-documented for high temperatures), the Norwegian soldiers lost the battle at Stamford Bridge, London, because they did not wear their armoury. -They had decided it was too hot to wear…

What I’m about to say isn’t me being outspoken or self-opinionated. It is one of those ‘Now Get This’ statements. I’m talking about global warming and here is my statement: For those of you who don’t know or are unaware, the current global warming situation is NOT carbon based. Okay, the planet is warming. So is the rest of the solar system, because global warming is due to a change in the sun’s solar activity. All the historical data is there to show how fluctuations in temperature on our planet have happened, regardless of CO2 production, because of the ebb and flow of the sun’s solar activity cycles throughout the years. The polar ice caps on Mars are melting and Jupiter is also affected by a rise in temperature. ‘Nobody producing greenhouses gases out there, well, as far as I know! For example, in the 1950′s, the post World War 2 boom in production industry. According to the carbon based theory,this should have produced global warming, but it didn’t because, like I’ve said, the current rising temperature of our planet is due to the sun’s solar activity. A great video that exposes the truth about global warming can be seen on Google, ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle.’ -An absolute must see. There are other good websites dedicated to real science showing how the carbon based global warming theory cannot be. I recently read in a newspaper how one politician proposed a complicated way of imposing a levy for carbon consuming. The lunacy goes on and on, thank goodness it was rejected. The elite that rule this planet want you to believe in carbon based global warming so that they can introduce con schemes like ‘carbon taxes’ for transport in order to profiteer and control you. Don’t be fooled by this ruse. I suggest you do your own research and I’m quite confident you will come to the same conclusion as me.