Global Warming: Myth or Reality - Essay Example

number Is Global Warming a Myth or Reality? The issue of global warming arose in the 60s of the last century and became one of the most debated and controversial topics of our time. Long-term observations let the scientists arrive at the conclusion that air temperature has increased by slightly more than one-tenth of a degree. In the 1980s this phenomenon turned to be a topic of UN reports. Air temperature was considered increase at an average by 0,3-0,6 degrees for the last 100 years. The presumptions of Swedish scientist Arrhenius, which became known at the beginning of the 1990s, have formed the opinion that global warming was caused by the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It was referred to carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor, exhilarant gas, freon gas, etc. During the intergovernmental conference in Madrid in 1995 UN proclaimed global warming to be a scientific fact. Nevertheless, nowadays there is a big number of respectable scientists denying the threat of global warming and proving such a large-scale problem to be just a great mystification, or at least an exaggeration. The theory of global warming comes down to the opinion that the increase of concentration of carbon dioxide in the air would necessarily cause the atmospheric temperature rise, earth surface and water warming. The defenders of this theory consider anthropogenic factor to be its main peculiarity. A huge amount of factories, plants, automobiles inject carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which causes a number of cataclysms around the whole world. Earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, tornados, and many other natural disasters may be considered as a consequence of global warming. The theory of global warming gained its worldwide notoriety on account of former vice president of the US Albert Gore. After the defeat at election in 2000, he directed his efforts to public activity connected with the investigations of global warming. In 2007 he was awarded with two Oscars for his film An Inconvenient Truth, illustrating previously unknown facts about global warming. This film turned to have a huge impact on the attitude towards this problem. Gore received a Nobel Prize for environmental protection and the research of climate change issue. His name turned to be a synonym of the protection of nature and global warming control. One more thing he managed to receive was the positive public image. Nevertheless, the theory of global warming has faced a lot of criticism. A great number of scientists deny the influence of CO2 on temperature. A famous American climatologist Piers Corbyn states that the influence of CO2 cannot explain the reasons of climate changes for the last millennium. As the majority of ecologists claims, if CO2 influenced the temperature rise, the atmospheric temperature would be much higher than the temperature of ground, since it contains much more carbon dioxide. There are two ways to measure the temperature of the atmosphere – satellites and meteorological balloons. The professor of UN Commission John Christy asserts that both these ways prove atmospheric temperature to be lower than ground temperature. This information conveys the suggestion that greenhouse gases could not be a reason of global warming. As the matter of fact, solar activity is the real reason. Being the basic vital source on the Earth, this star turns to be a reason of warming. Its activity causes the appearance of so called sunspots. Sunspot – it is a strong magnetic field appearing at the moment of solar activity increase. Age-long observations and researches conducted by meteorologists have shown – the more sunspots exist, the warmer it is on the Earth. In 1983 an Italian scientist Cassini noticed that there were no sunspots during the Little Ice Age in the 14-19th centuries. In 1991 a group of scientists representing Danish University of Meteorology intended to investigate how the sunspots have been correlating with temperature rise during the 20th century. Their results acknowledge the temperature rise till the 1940s and its decrease till the 1970s, though it continued growing in the course of time. Thus, the theory of global warming seems to be untruthful. The question is what is it for? This theory started gaining popularity in the 1990s, when people were frightened by the threat of ozone holes. Their appearance was caused by freon gas, though the atmosphere contains negligible quantity of it. Nevertheless, American manufacturers of refrigeration equipment, using no freon gas while production, decided to pick up this idea. Some of the deodorant producers have chosen the same path. All of these became a reason of collapse pounced upon the producers of freon gas and a motive for consumers to buy expensive refrigerators and deodorants instead of comparatively cheap freon containing ones. Nevertheless, greenhouse gases are still claimed to be to blame in global warming. A huge variety of worldwide accepted scientists and meteorologists invoke to decrease the emissions of greenhouse gases. At the same time, this suggestion seems to have no chance to be implemented in practice. All the people dream to live a better life, drive their cars, consume enough food, and use all the benefits of medical progress. All the developing countries categorically refuse to engage themselves with this commitment. At the same time, third-world countries contribute to this problem more and more. In 2018 they are predicted to produce much more emissions than Western countries do. This implies that all the measures taken by Western countries are going to have no effect. Thus, many European countries demonstrate a deep concern with a threat of approaching ecocatastrophe, and hail criticism on the US for denunciation of Kyoto protocol. This protocol obliges the US to decrease the electricity consumption by one third. Though, none of European countries would ever agree to sacrifice their economic interests and to fulfill the conditions of this agreement. The American Department of Energy has reported that this commitment would decrease the gross domestic product of the US at least by 4%. American economy would lose competitive abilities on the world market, a great number of companies would move abroad, and millions of people would lose their workplaces. It would cause an economic crisis of indescribable scale and a rapid decline in the living standards. It is no wonder that this protocol was not even sent to Senate ratification. Senators would never adopt a plan of country devastation. If to assume that the US and all the other countries around the whole world followed the conditions of this protocol, their indescribable efforts would be unlikely to have any effect at all. The problem of global warming would not be solved. Most of ecoalarmists accept that this process is inconvertible, unstoppable, and even more – it is impossible to make it flow more slowly. Even the most drastic measures taken in order to fight against greenhouse gases would slow down the temperature rise not more than by 4-6% until the end of the century. The leaders of worldwide ecological movement are undoubtedly aware that there is no point to pay such a heavy price. Therefore, environmental concern may be just a mask for some of them. Thus, the theory of global warming seems to be a kind of a huge commercial project created in order to gain public acceptance. Environmental protection turned to be a political instrument. It is possible to call global warming one of the forms of propagandistic weapon in the hands of politicians, who are exploring a sphere of meteorology. This theory may become a means to gain political recognition in society. Today, ecologists may be considered not only as scientists, but also as participants of political game whose statements have a great influence on public conscience. The threat of a global problem turned to be an instrument of money making. The total number of attempts taken in order to solve this problem may be assessed in milliards of dollars. World population is so much accustomed to the phrase “global warming” that the fact of its existence is no longer questioned. At the same time, the issue of the nature, essence, and appearance causes of this phenomenon remains open. The question concerning the spectrum of possible consequences for human civilization and nature has no answer yet as well. There are no doubts that anthropological factor has largely contributed to the nature pollution. Nevertheless, it is unlikely to do so much harm as the defenders of global warming theory assert. The influence of humankind exerted on the nature may be exemplified by the deforestation, ground pollution, but not by temperature change. The director of the Institute of Oceanology RAS S. Lappo claims that there is no certainty that the humankind has sufficiently explored those processes, which take place in different earth mantles. That is why the fact of climate change may be announced only in relation to the specific place and time. This scientist has also stated that the exchange of СО2 between the atmosphere and the ocean surpasses the emissions appeared due to human activity. Therefore, the anthropological impact may certainly be felt, but human economic activity cannot influence those gigantic streams which can cause climate change. Thus, global warming and the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are not caused by human activity. A lot of time, energy, and trillions of dollars are spent in order to fight with a problem possessing no scientific support. For example, the representatives of natural environmental protection in Canada reported that almost 4 milliards dollars have been spent to fight against the climate change for the last 5 years. Taking this into consideration, society cannot remain indifferent any more. It is vitally important for people not to forget that the primary purpose of ecology is to help people protect the environment, but not to become one more instrument of profit making. Works Cited Christy, John, and William Norris. Methodology and Results of Calculating Central California Surface Temperature Trends: Evidence of Human-Induced Climate Change? American Meteorological Society, Feb. 2006. Web. 2006. Helden, Albert. The beginnings, from Lipperhey to Huygens and Cassini. SpringerLink, Mar. 2009. Web. Apr. 2009. Russian Academy of Sciences. Lappo Sergey Sergeevich. Oceanology, n.d. Web. Jul. 2006. Standage, Tom. Everyone Complains About the Weather... Piers Corbyn Is Doing Something About It.Wired, Feb. 1999. Web. Mar. 2007. Read More