At face value, working to halt the effects of global warming should be a simple matter. That is, unless you begin to really delve into the subject and your first exposure to the debate are groups denying the validity of the science of ascertaining global temperatures from the outset. Why then will you or any other average person be interested in playing a part in the solution when it is impossible to know what the truth really is? This is part of the problem with the Internet; people accept whatever is online as substantiated truth, only to discover there are ulterior motives or opinionated sides spinning their view as truth, on both sides of the debate.
A specific website, globalwarming.org, on the surface presents as trustworthy loaded with scientific fact, so let's start there. As you read, you will be nodding in agreement, and growing increasingly passionate about halting global warming, but once you visit the frequently asked questions or the student resource tab, things change. For every fact, there is a counter argument disproving it, and in the end it makes the global warming debate seem like a circus. The whole thrust of these pages is showing the global warming debate has been over inflamed.
If you really want to get to the bottom of the debate, you need to be prepared to investigate who is sponsoring which information website on each side of the debate. When there is a profit to be made from standing against any move to enforce industry standards on emissions, clearly you have a questionable motive behind the "facts" being presented.
Of course, there are sources of valuable certified information online that have carried out authentic scientific tests. Usually, though, they are forced to present it as theories only because as of this stage, no facts are yet concrete. In the end, even though it may be hard to accept, money will be the deciding factor against what is presented as truth. However, when research has been carried out through university and higher learning research centers, the results have a greater chance of being unbiased. That is how it should always be with science. It has to remain impartial, despite driving factors from either side of the debate, and be free of the bribery of money to really be able to present the facts in an unbiased way.
One of the main reasons halting global warming is now a big deal, is that it is in the mainline media as a topic, and many of them are claiming the Bush Administration purposely withheld information on the true effects of global warming, and withheld facts proving global warming truly is a vital current issue affecting everyone. Some media outlets claim the Bush Administration purposely withheld this data, as well as statistics and proof of changes in climate throughout North America. Is this going to increase our understanding of global warming? That is hard to answer until these facts are actually shared openly with the general public.
Until it is proven that the information on global warming does not have strings attached or ulterior motives to the way it is being presented, there will always be public doubt about the true effects global warming is or isn't having on the Earth's environment and our day to day living. For now, each one must choose his side according to his own conscience. But ultimately what is needed is good solid facts, proof that this is indeed an issue, so that the wider international community can come into unanimous agreement on the topic of global warming.
A specific website, globalwarming.org, on the surface presents as trustworthy loaded with scientific fact, so let's start there. As you read, you will be nodding in agreement, and growing increasingly passionate about halting global warming, but once you visit the frequently asked questions or the student resource tab, things change. For every fact, there is a counter argument disproving it, and in the end it makes the global warming debate seem like a circus. The whole thrust of these pages is showing the global warming debate has been over inflamed.
If you really want to get to the bottom of the debate, you need to be prepared to investigate who is sponsoring which information website on each side of the debate. When there is a profit to be made from standing against any move to enforce industry standards on emissions, clearly you have a questionable motive behind the "facts" being presented.
Of course, there are sources of valuable certified information online that have carried out authentic scientific tests. Usually, though, they are forced to present it as theories only because as of this stage, no facts are yet concrete. In the end, even though it may be hard to accept, money will be the deciding factor against what is presented as truth. However, when research has been carried out through university and higher learning research centers, the results have a greater chance of being unbiased. That is how it should always be with science. It has to remain impartial, despite driving factors from either side of the debate, and be free of the bribery of money to really be able to present the facts in an unbiased way.
One of the main reasons halting global warming is now a big deal, is that it is in the mainline media as a topic, and many of them are claiming the Bush Administration purposely withheld information on the true effects of global warming, and withheld facts proving global warming truly is a vital current issue affecting everyone. Some media outlets claim the Bush Administration purposely withheld this data, as well as statistics and proof of changes in climate throughout North America. Is this going to increase our understanding of global warming? That is hard to answer until these facts are actually shared openly with the general public.
Until it is proven that the information on global warming does not have strings attached or ulterior motives to the way it is being presented, there will always be public doubt about the true effects global warming is or isn't having on the Earth's environment and our day to day living. For now, each one must choose his side according to his own conscience. But ultimately what is needed is good solid facts, proof that this is indeed an issue, so that the wider international community can come into unanimous agreement on the topic of global warming.
No comments:
Post a Comment