GLOBAL WARMING: Science Speaks For Itself

Science does best in the physical sciences (geology, chemistry, biology, etc. which deal entirely with the objective what is), not quite so well in the social sciences which deal with the institutions and functioning of human society and with the interpersonal relationships (what may be) of individuals as members of society.  Relationships necessarily have a subjective and uncertain element which, by definition, does not lend itself well to objective analyses.

Political Science is a social science concerned with the study of the state, nation, government, and politics and policies of government. It deals extensively with the theory and practice of politics and the analysis of political systems, behavior, and culture. Political scientists “see themselves engaged in revealing the relationships underlying political events and conditions, and from these revelations they attempt to construct general principles about the way the world of politics works.” For a more in-depth description of politics goto

The social sciences employ an element of art (defined as the subjective “expression or application of human creative skill and imagination”) not present in the physical sciences.  As you can see by the above-referenced description of politics, politics may be better described as an art rather than a science.

Now let scientists allow reality to speak for itself:

First: Earth is in a natural general warming trend, recovering from the last glacial epoch that ended about 15,000 years ago.  Really.  If this natural phenomenon results in ice melting, that’s nature speaking for itself.

Given that atmospheric carbon dioxide (a ‘greenhouse gas’ that makes up only 0.0004 of the atmosphere and never classified a pollutant by the Clean Air Act of 1070) levels are increased by burning of fossil fuels and that it is necessary for life on earth (it feeds plants, which convert it to the oxygen necessary for animals), we ought to be concerned.  But the dire consequences (Miami and New York being inundated in the near future, etc.) are hardly realistic (and if they ever are inundated, we’ll have to adapt to that, too).  Certainly the Arctic ice cap may be melting, but the Antarctic ice cap is growing. For more information, goto: for an in-depth (pun intended) exposition on that great stabilizing factor: water.

The political (yes they are, and overwhelmingly liberal) contingent predicting gloom and doom relies on mathematical models constructed by a group of consensus scientists loyal to the cause (yes they are).  These models are constructed with a dearth of real-world information, because there’s so much we don’t know .  What we do know, however, is often missing from the models.  For instance: temperature observations made by balloons and satellites of the uppermost atmosphere that show less than half (actually closer to 35%) of the warming shown in the dire projections. Also, natural compensation (an increase in plant life to use more CO2 to produce more Oxygen) is ignored, as is the massive ‘heat sink’ of the oceans covering 70% of Earth’s surface and containing 312 MILLION CUBIC MILES of water.   And water vapor, an integral part of the atmosphere—humidity, clouds, rain, snow—making  up about 75% of all ‘greenhouse gases’ as well.

 Let’s call it a day…

The ‘information’ presented at the beginning of Part One of this article ought to at least suggest that the climate doomsayers are clutching at straws for support of their untenable positions.  The global warming scare is a lie and unethical.; its objective is power and money.  Any number of articles on this website are full of points not considered by the doomsayers—feel free to check out our articles on global warming, climate change, and politics, and feel free to comment on (or challenge) these views.  We can take the heat…

Leave a Reply