Now I understand better... There is a massive cost in human suffering and world impacting pollution mostly in the developing nation's. Greenpeace's co-founder's writings and lectures were my turning point. That and someone actually pointing out the math...
A one in 10,000 change in total atmospheric CO2 is what all of this is about and maybe only half of the increase is manmade?
If 10,000 super balls were used to represent the atmosphere it would consist of:
7,809 blue - nitrogen
2,095 red - oxygen
93 pink - argon
4 black - CO2
It seems the "entire" scientific world wants you to believe that going from 3 to 4 black balls is causing pretty much everything bad and nothing good.
Again finding out man's not responsible for 100% of the actual CO2 increase was my tipping point. That CO2, like the ocean levels and temperature had been trending up well before man's CO2 contribution was the nail in the coffin.
Something is going on... 6000+ scientists (an that's just the leadership) depending on research grants have skewed the science towards catastrophe. No matter what you have been lead to believe science isn't democratic. Scientists definitely don't make policy. Science doesn't care if 99% of all scientist agree on something, if they are wrong they are wrong.
Throughout history scientist and group think have come up short. The truth eventually comes out and the aha moment sometimes is painful. Time after time innovation and scientific advancement come at the expense of disproving previous well established beliefs.
 |
| 10,000 balls... Can you see the four black ones? |
