There certainly has been a lot in the newspaper and on TV about global warming. In fact, there has been more information on global warming than there ever was on Y2K, which if you'll recall was to be the calamity of all calamities caused by mankind. There were almost as many articles on Y2K in the media as during the Cold War; you remember that of course we were all supposed to die by nuclear holocaust during an exchange of nuclear weapons with Russia.

Perhaps it is time that we get the facts straight about global warming. The global warming alarmist will have you believe that the Earth is heating up and yet what you might not realize is that the world set a global cool weather record in 2007. In fact, 2007 was the coolest in the last 16 years. What does this mean? Is global warming over or did it never really exist? Does the Earth really go through climate fluctuations and cycles and there is really nothing that mankind can do about it?

Or are humans and their activities such as the emissions of CO2 really causing our climate to heat up enough to melt all the ice caps and flood every human civilization that is less than 30 feet above sea level? Isn't it time that humans stop believing everything they see in the media or hear on TV and start looking at the facts, which by the way are not docudramas meant to scare you and make Hollywood millions of dollars on movies. Something to contemplate in 2008.

Let's get the facts straight shall we? In 2007 the World Set global cool weather records. Learn more about the reality behind the Global Cooling:

washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140

By: Lance W.
My name is Lance Winslow and I am a semi-retired entrepreneur, retired Franchisor and now I am a consultant brain-4-hire, internet writer and author. I got bored in retirement so I founded the Online Think Tank - http://www.worldthinktank.net.

If you would like to send me an email just to say hi, discuss an article, send me hate mail or need some advice you can find me at; http://www.carwashguys.com/history/founder.html - Have a great day and thanks for reading - tell me about you?

Submitted by:
Josh Truegood
International Issues from Knowledge Is Power

There is no evidence that levels of C02 affect the warming of the planet, the fact is that it changes constantly throughout the planets lifecycle. But humoring the gullable and the sheep out there that believe what ever the government tells them, the following will explain the major contributors of C02.

The oceans are the greatest contributor, due to the trillions of algae/plankton that produce 15 times of what all the human produce. Next is the decaying matter and dead animals that produce almost the same as the oceans. So thats 30 times more than what we produce.

The next is trees, many believe that trees suck up C02 and prodcue oxygen for life, but this is WRONG, growing trees do do this but mature trees actually stop this and produce more C02 than oxygen. Maybe we should cut down all mature trees to save the planet.

Next animals which includes us humans just releasing greenhouse gases produce way more than all the factories cars etc.

Also volcanoes, it is estimated that 1 eruption from a large volcane releases what we produce in 6 months. Of course there are other things that produce C02. So humans maybe produce about a hundreth of the planets C02 do you still think by turning your TV to standby or using energy saving lightbulbs makes any difference?

The fact is the theory of Global warming due to C02 outputs from humans is just a political policy that is used to TAX people, they employ their own scientists to give credit to there arguments, and select the only ones that agree with them to show to the public.

When will the world stop believing exactly what is told to them, without any evidence and make up their own minds. The government lies that is fact!

By: Stephen Thorpe

Featured By Resources For Attorneys, a Legal Resources and Lifestyle Resources portal.

For more legal resources in California see California Legal Resources.

Are you getting depressed over what's going on in the world today? Do you need something to pick you up? Do you need some laughter in your life? Check out our Jokes index and brighten your day.

Why is everyone so worried about global warming when in reality they should be worried about global cooling in the next coming Ice Age? There is a book out called; Not by Fire, But By Ice. In this book it explains why global warming or climate change is not really an issue at all, instead we should get our civilizations prepared for a coming Ice Age in about 150 to 400 years.

In fact many anthropologists believe that the heat of the atmosphere has given mankind and the human species time to regroup and evolve. Hot Begets Not, Hotter Climates go until the pendulum swings and an ice age cometh; That is The Truth about Global Warming.

Global warming assumes that it is caused by mankind and the climate scientist that believe in global warming say that it is caused by mankind's CO2 emissions from our factories, power plants and transportation. While this theory sounds somewhat plausible and yes climate change in the atmosphere might be affected some what by human emissions there are far greater causes that might he get the climate besides the head lice or locusts (mankind) that is dwelling on the surface.

If these climate scientists, politicians and everyone were reality based in their thinking then they would come up with solutions that we have discussed in our online think tank.

For instance; why not plant six to 8 billion trees; developed the clean coal technology innovations that have already been discovered for our power plants; put coatings on the roads in concrete and tops of buildings in our large cities to prevent urban heat; collect the CO2 in the atmosphere that is over large cities and use it for another purpose?

You see there are many solutions to the problem of climate change that if mankind were really serious and wanted to do something about it they could. But rather the global warming debate is much to do about politics and power control.

Global warming is not real. I certainly hope this article is of interest and that is has propelled thought. The goal is simple; to help you in your quest to be the best in 2007. I thank you for reading my many articles on diverse subjects, which interest you.

By: Lance Winslow
"Lance Winslow" - If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington.

Featured By Resources For Attorneys, a Legal Resources and Lifestyle Resources portal.

For more legal resources in California see California Legal Resources.

Are you getting depressed over what's going on in the world today? Do you need something to pick you up? Do you need some laughter in your life? Check out our Jokes index and brighten your day.

As the United Nations Security Council prepares to debate a third round of sanctions against Iran for its continuing refusal to stop its uranium enrichment program, it is time for the five permanent, veto-wielding states to get serious about their efforts to curb the ambitions of an increasingly powerful and defiant clerical regime in Tehran.

So far, the United Nations has managed only two weak sanctions resolutions, one in December and a second in March. What effect have these measures had on the ability of the Iranians to continue their nuclear pursuits, in spite of repeated demands from the international community that such activities be stopped immediately? You be the judge:

**Abdolreza Rahmani-Fazli, Deputy Secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, was recently quoted as saying that Iran currently has 1,600 active centrifuges for enriching uranium and that Iran is installing 3,000 centrifuges in the Natanz nuclear facility. The Deputy Secretary also said that Iran plans to construct more than 50,000 of these centrifuges in the future.

**Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated in the last few weeks that Iran intends to continue its nuclear program, become an exporter of nuclear fuel, and ignore any future U.N. Security Council resolutions against it.

**Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader and the real power behind the government in Tehran, has said in just the past few days that Iran would never back down from its nuclear right.

**A report from the International Atomic Energy Agency on May 22, 2007 stated that there had been notable advances in Iran's uranium enrichment program and that the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency knew less about Iran's nuclear efforts than has been the case in the past.

Maybe it's time for the member states of the United Nations to start taking Iranian leaders at their word and recognize that they have meant what they have said about their nuclear program all along. Iran has carefully worked to position itself as the dominant power in the Middle East. Tehran continues to sponsor the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon and there is increasing evidence of direct Iranian involvement in arming Iraqi insurgents and militias. And, just this week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that Iranian weapons were making their way to the Taliban in Afghanistan. And while Secretary Gates said there was no evidence of direct involvement by the government in Tehran, does anyone believe that weapons are being funneled from a tightly controlled theocratic state to the Taliban without the knowledge of the ruling clerical regime?

Iran wants to dominate the entire Middle East, and its actions in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, and with the United Nations all contribute to that long-range strategic goal. The development of a nuclear capability that could be used to produce weapons of mass destruction would make it much easier for Iran to realize its national objectives in the region and could spark a wider crisis if Israel or Sunni-dominated governments feel threatened enough to act in an effort to counter the Iranian push.

Thus far, negotiations that have included very attractive incentives packages from the European Union and the west have yielded no real progress as Tehran continues to stall for time with the U.N. while working feverishly to fully develop its nuclear capability. With negotiations failing, there are really only two options available for nations opposed to the continuing nuclear developments in Iran: a military strike or tough, meaningful sanctions that will have a real impact on Tehran.

The United Nations will never act to authorize a preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Even if all five permanent members of the Security Council agreed that Iran posed a grave threat to stability and security in the region, which they don't, France, Russia, and China would never vote to allow a military strike on a country in which they are so heavily invested. That would leave the United States, and possibly Great Britain, to execute such an attack without the backing of the U.N., something that is probably not realistic given the probable regional and international consequences of such a move.

With a military endeavor against Iran unlikely, we return once again to the prospect of additional sanctions designed to curb Tehran's nuclear aspirations. Historically, economic sanctions have been relatively ineffective, especially when the targeted behavior is deemed crucial to national interests by the state subject to the sanctions or when imposing nations enforce the sanctions half-heartedly, or even worse, not at all.

The acquisition by Iran of a nuclear capability that can be used to produce atomic weapons poses a serious threat to the Middle East and to the rest of the world. The consequences of such a development are severe, and the options for dealing with this threat are limited.

If the international community is willing to live with the prospect of a Middle East dominated by Iran, and the consequences associated with such a shift in the balance of power in the region, then we can expect the next round of debate in the Security Council to produce another weak condemnation of Iranian nuclear activities. If the member states of the U.N. are truly worried about the spread of Iranian influence and power, though, then the time is rapidly approaching for them to demonstrate the seriousness of this situation. The best way to do that is by authorizing measures tough enough to demonstrably affect Tehran's ability to defy the U.N. and pursue a nuclear program capable of developing nuclear weapons.

By: Greg Reeson
http://reeson.townhall.com
Greg Reeson is a Featured Author for The Veterans' Voice and a regular contributor to The New Media Journal, GOPUSA, and The Land of the Free.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, a Legal Resources and Lifestyle Directory portal.

Are you getting depressed over what's going on in the world today? Do you need something to pick you up? Do you need some laughter in your life? Check out our Jokes index and brighten your day.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.

To earn a living, scientists or engineers must obtain funding for their projects. To get this funding, they are forced to become marketers and try to sell their ideas to their potential benefactors.

One good excuse for obtaining funding is to claim that at some future time a tragedy will befall the human race if something isn't done about it now. As long as there is enough data being created to signal impending doom, the influx of funds will continue to the ones performing the research.

Impending doom is good for the media too. Reporters have a lot to talk about; the more they scare the public, the more attention the public gives the media networks, and the more advertising dollars they get.

Politicians have to get involved too. The more laws they pass to save the world, the more the media-conditioned masses applaud their efforts and insure their reelection.

Let's look at what the media said would be a major tragedy, and how tens of billions of dollars were spent to avert it. The disaster never happened and lot of the money spent was wasted. This event should still be fresh in all but the youngest memories. It was labeled "Y2K" and ended just over seven years ago.

It came about because early mainframe computers were programmed using two digits to store the year instead of four. Thus "98" meant 1998 and "95" meant 1995. The older software would not know how to interpret "00"; it could mean 1900 or 2000. It was believed that some financial systems could crash if this problem was not corrected by the time the clock hit midnight bringing in the year 2000.

Many banks and financial institutions were aware of the problem and had it fixed or upgraded their software long before the end of the century.

With the help of the news media, "Y2K" turned into a serious business during the last decade of the twentieth century. Experts were often seen appearing on TV warning about the horrible things that would happen if every computerized device was not made "Y2K" compatible.

"Y2K" even made it to the movies. In the popular movie "Office Space" the main character, Peter Gibbons, was a "Y2K" engineer. "Y2K: The Movie" was a made-for-television movie released in late 1999 that depicted all the possible horrors that could occur because of "Y2K."

In 1999, I was working for the Chicago branch of a Technical College as a systems administrator. This college had over eighty branches throughout the U.S. and each branch got its policy from corporate headquarters. I was in charge of maintaining over 300 computers, the majority of which were used as student laboratory computers.

It was early in 1999, when the corporate directive came. All computers in school had to be made "Y2K" compatible. I tried to explain to the school director that it makes no sense to upgrade student lab computers, since they are not used in production and most of the PC software that the students run already recognized the year 2000. The experts have told them that the ROMs (Read Only Memories) had to be upgraded.

On the newer computers I was able to download a ROM update and flash the ROMs. On older computers the ROM chips had to be physically changed. We had to get "Y2K" engineers to come and change the chips. This service cost thousands of dollars. What really irritated me, was that requests for things the students or instructors really needed were always denied, instead the corporate idiots spent their money on useless upgrades. Undoubtedly, they must have made all their eighty schools "Y2K" compatible.

As 1999 drew to a close, rumors of impending doom became more prevalent. The media kept emphasizing the possibility of riots. People were buying bottled water, wood stoves, and other survival gear, expecting the worse.

Then the new century rolled in, and nothing happened. It is estimated that 300 billion dollars were spent trying to make everything "Y2K" compatible. I would guess that only a small fraction of the total expenditure was really necessary.

I also have a consulting business, and none of computers I own were made "Y2K" compatible nor did I recommend that my clients make any "Y2K" upgrades. I have never seen a "Y2K" problem, nor has any client reported one.

Now let's look at the present. In 2006 the former vice president and ex presidential candidate Al Gore released a documentary called "The Inconvenient Truth." This documentary discusses a phenomenon called global warming. According to the film scientists are saying that the earth's temperature is rising because of man's carbon dioxide emissions. This rise in temperature can have cataclysmic effects on our world.

The film received an Academy Award for best documentary. This revived Gore's career as a politician.

Experts are popping up throughout the world saying something must be done to avert disaster. The media has already assumed that most scientists agree that global warming is a reality and that we can expect dire consequences if we do not act.

Thus the new "Y2K" is born. This one can last more than ten years as long as the experts keep feeding the frenzy. Global Warming has now become a big business. As long as favorable data keeps being generated, the research keeps being funded and the media happily passes it on to the public.

The politicians are there to pass all the laws needed, no matter how ridiculous, to save the planet from impending doom. They can expect more votes from masses who have been thoroughly indoctrinated about the horrors of global warming from media propaganda.

Some scientists do not agree with the findings of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the United Nations group pushing global warming. They concur that currently the earth's surface temperature is warming. However, they contend that solar activity data correlates much closer to the increase of the earth's surface temperature than man's carbon dioxide emissions. They also say that the computer models used to predict future disasters are based on incomplete data and can't accurately foretell upcoming events.

I've seen the movie "The Inconvenient Truth." Gore tries to illustrate his point by using a standard IPCC hockey stick curve, that many critics dispute. The majority of the movie gives examples of the bad things that are happening supposedly because of global warming. But if the major premise is wrong, then his examples of extreme weather are just events based on the unpredictability of climate change. The film feels like it's more emotional than factual. It's seems entertaining enough as a documentary to deserve the academy award.

The opposition has several films out. The best one can be seen on Google video. It is called The Great Global Warming Swindle (1hr 14min). This film is much more informative than Gore's documentary, since it gives a thorough and very convincing explanation of why global warming opponent scientists believe that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels do not influence climate change.

Global warming is being marketed pretty much like "Y2K" was in the late nineties. Even Hollywood is capitalizing on it. The opening lines of the movie "AI: Artificial Intelligence (2001)" predict the melting of polar ice caps due to greenhouse gases and the flooding of cities like New York. More recently, "The Day After Tomorrow (2004)" predicted massive climate change because of unabated global warming.

I think that the scientists who oppose global warming present a much better case than the ones for it. But because global warming is "politically correct" these days, the opposition is largely ignored or accused of being paid by oil companies in order to sabotage the "inconvenient truth."

By: George Lunt
This article is © George Lunt.
George Lunt is someone who feels the world is getting too corporate. His writings relate the individual's struggle with big government and big corporations. His website is http://www.corporate-aliens.com.

Featured By Resources For Attorneys, a Legal Information and Lifestyle Resource portal.

For more legal resources in California see California Legal Resources.

Are you getting depressed over what's going on in the world today? Do you need something to pick you up? Do you need some laughter in your life? Check out our Jokes index and brighten your day.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.