Global warming - who's to blame

An extraordinary vast amount of money is being spent because it is put out in the media that we, the inhabitants of this planet, are the cause of global warming, and that we can do something about it if we cut down on our emissions, carbon dioxide being the allegedly main culprit. Since the start of this campaign other gases have been brought forward as being equally important, if not more so. Persons, many seemingly qualified to do so, have joined the bandwagon and have been recorded as undertaking research into their own particular theory and have come up with results that have reinforced their view that their thinking is right and that this should be seriously heeded in the overall campaign to reduce the effect that humanity allegedly has on ‘global warming’.

The Leaders have looked towards the alleged greatest pollution countries and have homed in on China with its vast programme of building coal fired power stations and have said we can’t have that going on, and if they can’t afford to do anything about it, we must help them out with finance so that they can go down a different route which produces fewer obnoxious gases. This financing, of course, comes out of our pockets! In our industrial expansion era, last century, we relied on coal fired power station and nobody stopped us. OK, so the downsides of such power generation were not realised at the time, but do we have the right to impose on other nations a regime of restricting coal fired stations with the additional expense that other forms of power production could generate when they don’t actually want to follow that route, especially as coal would appear to be easily available in that part of the world?

And what are we up to, building vast wind turbines that are unreliable in their power generation because of the vagaries of the wind, it many times not being available when the electricity is required. There is also the problem that the turbines themselves have not produced the power promised even when the wind is evident? We must have a reliable source of electricity power generation in the future! The most reliable source of power could be from the tidal range round the country, this not deviating from year to year.

There is no problem with the concept of finding alternatives to the use of fossil fuels, possibly with public funding, but please publically pursue this aim, rather than colouring it with the concept of partially or even greatly reducing ‘global warming’. There is a growing properly informed belief that man will make no difference to ‘global warming’.

In order to persuade the non believer that humans can influence ‘global warming’ would someone please come out of the woodwork and explain what is wrong with the information that has been derived from cores taken in the Antarctic ice field which show that planet Earth controls itself within a recurring repetitive cycle, without any influence from the inhabitants at the time. The following is a graph showing the results of such investigations, comparing the temperatures and carbon dioxide proportions over a considerable time frame. It will be noted that the temperature recorded now is no higher that it was in previously recorded peaks, even though the carbon dioxide content is considerably higher!

The graph shows changes in Carbon Dioxide content and Temperatures over a considerable time scale, the details being published by a reliable source.

It shows the fluctuations in temperature (blue line) and in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (red line) over the past 400,000 years. The vertical red bar at the end is the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels during the two centuries prior to 2007, this happening without altering the global temperature.

Now will someone please show us where it proves that man has had any influence on 'global warming'? That's the blue line we are talking about. One needs to bear in mind that the information put into this graph has been 'peer reviewed', and is therefore accepted as being accurate by all the relevant specialists.