I don't believe in the Global Warming idea Video

Hello. Today I'd like to talk about Global Warming!
First of all, I don't believe in the global warming idea and I'd like to explain why.
What is the global warming idea?
Basically it is a set of 4 ideas.
The first idea is that the planet is getting warmer.
Second is that this warming is caused by human activity.
Third, that the global warming will bring about catastrophic consequences to humanity.
Fourth, that humanity has the capacity to control global climate.
Let's take a closer look at each of these ideas.

Is the planet actually getting warmer or not?
Earth is definitely getting warmer or cooler, I don't know which, but the global climate is definitely changing because it has always been changing, it has never been static or stable.
There have been many Ice Ages in the past, probably there will many more Ice Ages in the future.
How can we know that the Earth's temperature is changing ? Of course we can use a thermometer, but the thermometer wil only tell us the temperature right now in the present. We also need to know the temperature of the Earth for the past 100 years to see if the temperature is changing due to industrialization.
As far as I know there seems to be no reliable method of estimating the temperature for the past 100 years, because for such short span the temperature difference is too small to be imprinted in natural phenomena.
Apparently the only evidence available is direct human recording, in which human beings measure the temperature with thermometers and record the data on books, but how reliable are these records? And even if these records show an increase in temperature, is it due to global warming or to the populational growth of the surroundings?

Let's suppose the Earth is getting warmer.
Is this warming due to human activity? What determines the global climate?
Apparently scientists still don't know what determines the global climate. We may guess that the Sun, the moon, all living beings incluing humans, the Earth's core probably have some influence on the global climate. But the exact relationship between all these factors is probably still unkown. Even supposing the Earth is getting warmer, human activity probably is not the main cause. For example the Sun most certainly have a much greater influence on the Earth's climate than human activity.

Let's suppose the Earth is getting warmer, and that this warming is caused by human activity.
Where is the evidence that this warming could be "catastrophic" to humanity? There were times in the past when the Earth was much warmer, and then colder than it is now, and it was not "catastrophic" to the living beings.
A warmer Earth could be beneficial to humankind, especially if you think about places like Canada and Russia, places that could become more amenable to human occupation. Sincerely I don't understand why people say we must stop global warming. What is the problem with a warmer Earth? How hot will the Earth become? Do you really believe the Earth will burn itself completely? Again where is the evidence for that? The fact is that most predictions about global warming turned out to be wrong. Apparently nobody really knows how the global climate works. Scientists are having a hard time trying to predict local, short term climate. For example phenomena like tornados, hurricanes, El Nino, are all local, short term phenomena. They should be easier to predict. If scientists cannot predict local, short term climate, supposedly easier things to predict, can you really think that scientists can predict the climate of the entire planet for the next 100 years? Scientists are having a hard time trying to predict if it is going to rain tomorrow in my city.

OK, but let's suppose that the Earth is getting warmer, that this warming is caused by human activity, that this warming will be catastrophic to humanity. Then we come to fourth assumption.
Is it possible to stop global warming? Is it possible to control the global climate? Again, scientists have a poor understanding of the global climate, scientists cannot accurately predict global climate, and in spite of that, we are supposing that scientists have the power to control the global climate, we are supposing that scientists have the power to stop global warming, even though scientists don't have the power to control the climate of a country, or even the climate of a small city, we are supposing that scientists have the power to control the climate of the entire planet.
Sincerely for me that is a wild, wild statement.
Some people say that all we have to do is reduce CO2 emissions. Do you really think it is that simple? For me this explanation is too simplistic. And the people who are saying these things are journalists, politicians and lawyers.

Save & Share:

hcm9999: Hello, Ryan! Thanks for replying! We may have the ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. How much it would impact the global climate is debatable. Even the IPCC concedes that even if we could stop completely the emissions of gas right now, the results wouldn't appear FOR CENTURIES. The problem with global warming is the waste of time and money that could be used to eliminate famine, for example.

hcm9999: I don't know about the ozone layer, can't say anything about it. Humans have some effect on Earth's climate. But so does all other living beings, the sun, the moon, the Earth's core. The problem is: are humans the main cause of climate change? Do humans have more impact on the Earth's climate than all the animals and plants combined? I am not against scientific research, I support more scientific research on global climate. But I am against political action based on insufficient evidence.

6663000: I don't have the energy to type out a coherent statement on the issue right now :) But I have always been a little skeptical about some of the aspects of global warming, or at least with the way in which it is being presented to the public.

crimsonigloo: I completely agree! [x]

RisuMiso: Lets look at it this way. Is CO2 a greenhouse gas? Look at Venus, the CO2 atmosphere is widely considered to be the primary cause of it's high temperature. Is pollution a large man made producer of CO2? Yes. Can it be significantly reduced? Yes. Would it be a bad thing to produce less pollution regardless of whether global warming is natural or not? Not in my opinion.

RisuMiso: Is it a POSSIBILITY that we could be causing global warming? Yes. Even if it is a 5% chance of happening, should we not take steps to reduce the outcome. To say that the effects of us taking steps against global warming won't happen for centuries so we should be ignorant, is being self centered. Global warming won't effect us either, but what we do can affect the future inhabitants of this planet.

ulmo: Olá, Hisao! O que se pensa sobre o aquecimento global no Japão? As pessoas sabem do que se trata? Se procupam com isso?

RisuMiso: "the problem with global warming is the waste of time and money" Really? Yes it costs money to improve technology and implement pollution reducing technology. Everyone you know, everyone you have ever heard of lives on this planet, we need to take care of it. I think that is more important than money. Military budgets far exceed any of these other costs, and famine could be eliminated if the world actually cared. I think to sit back and just do nothing to reduce pollution is ridiculous

RisuMiso: I'll say it once again. Don't worry about things you cannot control (moon, sun, etc.). Worry about what we can control (pollution emissions).

RisuMiso: How about this. What if everyone thought like you and you ended up being wrong. Consequence = everyone loses. Pale blue dot dies. What if everyone thinks like me and I'm wrong, global warming doesn't happen. Consequence = we pollute less, develop more efficient environmentally technology, and have a cleaner planet. I don't see any positive things to come out of ignoring the issue.

Gaeilge2000: I saw a man on the street corner with a sign claiming "the sky is falling." We all thought he was a nut, even though factories were spewing carbon emissions like crazy. But the world is a big place and i am breathing just as good now, as i did in the 60's. True, factories had to stop burning so much coal and we all had to conserve. Now that nut on the street is in college scaring people about global warming. scare tactics! Conserve, yes, but to put fear into our minds if we don't is ridiculous.

guimasun: Like some others user's posts below, I think I can't have a reasonable opinion on the issue, but there's one thing I think I can. You said the global warming may be caused even from the population growth. The greenhouse gas emissions AND many other bad effects are directly caused by the population growth, this is what really should be addressed with higher priority.

hcm9999: Hello, Alexandre! Thanks for commenting! No, no, that is not what I meant! I didn't say global warming is caused by population growth. Some places like New York actually show an increase in temperature, but it is most probably because of population growth than global warming. If you want to measure global warming, you have to go to deserts and wildernesses, far from cities.

hcm9999: Olá, Carlos! Obrigado por comentar! Então, eu sou cético a respeito dessa idéia de aquecimento global. Mas aparentemente eu sou minoria aqui no Japão.

hcm9999: Hello, Leigh! Sorry for the controversial video.. I was is doubt if I should post this video or not, I was sure I would receive a lot of criticisms, but... what can I do? That is my opinion...

hcm9999: You refer to CO2 as "pollution". Technically CO2 is not a pollutant. Most animals exhale CO2, CO2 is necessary for plants to survive. But I digress. I almost don't talk about CO2 in my video because CO2 emissions WILL BE REDUCED, not matter what, not because of global warming, but because of depletion of oil. Oil is going to disappear, probably in our lifetimes, and also all the gas-fueled cars. That is why everybody is trying to develop the electric car.

RisuMiso: You make some good points. However life on this planet evolved with the environment behaving in a certain way. If we unnaturally throw the balance out by producing an abnormal amount of greenhouse gases, bad things could possibly occur. All I'm saying is we can takes some steps to mitigate the possible side effects from our gross consumption of natural resources. I don't think we should burn every last piece of coal or oil before we make a move.

RisuMiso: As a power plant operator I'll tell you, f you have the right equipment in your plant you can significantly reduce the amount of pollution produced, and in effect get more out of the fuel.

ilovebraziljapan: Isto é uma outra coisa que preciso estudar...Desculpa, não sei...Não entendo...

TRUMPHENT: You are wearing a black T shirt in the video. Go stand outside in direct sunlight for an hour. Then, go switch shirts for a brand new white T shirt. You do not have a even a vague clue about the difference between weather and climate. Take some physics and mathematics classes at your local community college, if, there are any in your country. Good luck in your life, you are blessed with living in interesting times.

hcm9999: Hello, sir! Thanks for replying! I don't understand your argument... Standing outside in direct sunlight is bad for the skin... Are you saying that dark colors absorb electromagnectic rays and light colors reflect them?? I knew that, I don't get your point... Are you talking about the ice-albedo feedback? Physics and mathematics used to be my favorite subjects at college.

hcm9999: According to the dictionary weather is "the state of the atmosphere with respect to wind, temperature, cloudiness, moisture, pressure, etc" and climate is "the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region, as temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds, throughout the year, averaged over a series of years." So climate IS weather over a long period of time.

TRUMPHENT: You need to inform the Arctic Ocean of your wisdom. It seems there is very little albedo left up there. Isotopic evidence proves man has increased atmospheric CO2 by 38% It's proven to be at work 24/7 over every square inch of the globe. The radiative forcing is very well known. Historical global temperatures are derived by ratios of isotopes of O from ice cores such as Vostock. Uncertainties in the science are explained by Dr S. Schneider. He has lectures posted on YT. I favorited them.

tropicaluvr97: I appeciate that you have some sort of excuses to justify your ignorance of the threat of global warming, because a lot of people dont have any information to back up their lack of understanding, however global warming is a real threat, and more people need to appreciate it's sevarity itstead of comming up with excusses to ignore it. global warming is a serious problem and people need to stop arguing this, accept it, and come up solutions to fix this problem.

hcm9999: Hello, Layla! Thanks for your concern! I am sorry if I don't agree with global warming. I am a bit suspicious about all the things that appear on the news, I think they are all so unconvincing... I admire you for being so concerned about the climate. I also worry about the climate, but feel frustrated when the explanations about it are so vague...

Author: hcm9999; Uploaded: Nov 9, 2009; Duration: 6:47; Views: 184

Tags: global  warming  skeptic  michael  crichton  state  of  fear  the trainline the aa thesaurus the pirate bay the range the times thesaurus.com the sun the mirror the guardian