According to several research, our global exterior heated range has improved by about 1 level F within the last millennium. Most of this modify has took place in the last two years, forcing the question: are our way of life increasing this international change? The proof definitely seems to factor in that route.

Many experts factor to the exhaust of techniques smells as one of the best factors that we are going through this international modify. Co2, methane, and nitrous oxide are some of the major substances that we are publishing more and more, producing something known as the ‘Greenhouse Effect’. This happens due to the truth that these smells usually entice heated, and when they are published into our higher environment, they entice some of the heated power that would normally be resembled by our global natural procedures.

It’s an established confirmed reality that there is more techniques gas in our environment due to humankind. Since the beginning of the business trend, it is approximated that the quantity of as well as dioxide in the environment has improved by as much as 30 %. While a little techniques gas helps to keep the world heated, the more and more that we launch, the warmer the earth is going to get. That is an important reality to consider, being that our biosphere is well updated to live at the conditions at which the world currently functions. Many varieties of both place and creature life run the risk of annihilation should the heated range modify be faster. Types of are mainly accountable for the quantity of techniques smells that we are publishing, and to help fix the issue, we are going to need to find an change source of power, and quick. Research into substitute power sources has produced several possible options, such as the use of hammer toe in the of ethanol, which has already had established utilization in locations such as Venezuela. The most faster interval of heated range modify has took place in the last 20 years, and it’s clearly obvious that we need to deal with this issue while we still can.

Their science studies tell us, that the Earth will be hotter in or around a million years from now due to this global warming which we, our grand children, or our great grand children, will never be able to confirm or deny. The few who started this hoax, Al Gore and a few others, knew it would convince those followers to come forth and holler along with them.  Billions of dollars have already been made by selling books, and collecting donations, and for what.  If it is going to happen, it will, and no amount of money will stop it. 

They blame it on carbon from factories, trucks, and cars.  Emissions are not enough to change how Mother Nature does her thing.  The last we knew, we had four seasons.  Last winter, they had a global warming conference which was snowed out due to a blizzard in Washington D.C.  So the chosen few, decided, they were going to be found out unless they changed the name from Global warming to Climate change.  Earth to Gore, Summer, it gets hot, cools down in the fall, chills up in the winter and warms up again in the spring as we enter summer.  These four seasons have been around since the dawn of time.  I was asked why then are the ice caps melting.  The ice caps melt all the time and always have been, and they freeze up too.  Nature is such a wonder.    If interested, when the time comes, I have some advise for you who believe, take off your coat. 

Earthquakes?  Blame it on global warming.  Volcano’s?  Blame it on global warming.  Rain, global warming, snow, global warming, fear mongering, blame it on the left who created global warming.

Please, if you have a rebuttle, do it because I think talking about things is a grand way to solve things.  Just holding it in will only cause you to explode somewhere down the road and then you will blame it on global warming.

For countries in the developing stage, progress is of a high priority. They need additional land for production of food grains and shelter of their burgeoning population. This entails deforestation and extensive mining and drilling for valuable resources such as oil and coal.

This process of deforestation is causing climatic changes and global warming, according to the environmentalists. While this declaration is not disputed, the pertinent question is where the priorities should lie? For a nation in need of natural resources, it is progress and not the protection of the environment that is paramount. If the environment gets affected, so be it. These countries need to provide food, shelter and other basic amenities and lift millions above the poverty line.

The countries campaigning for protection of the environment are the one who use the earth’s resources to the maximum extent. The maximum gas guzzler cars are found in advanced countries like the USA and Europe.

Further, these countries do not use the natural resources available to them for saving the environment. Such actions have a domino effect and affect the countries less developed.  Not exploiting the vast reserves of oil and natural gas in Alaska and oil yielding sands, in Canada, are cases in point. Had these resources been used, the oil prices would have come down considerably and helped the economies of other countries.

Global warming and climate change are made out to be large size monsters too difficult to handle. Today, technology has developed so much that cloud seeding to produce rain is exceedingly common. This year, the North America had the warmest winters in forty years, but it was none the worse due to this. Right now, Europe is going through regular snow storms etc. Tropical countries like India had severe winter causing several deaths. However, this climatic change was not something dreadful or unmanageable. It gave a warning to the governments to be prepared for next winter. The casualties can be minimized by constructing warm shelters for the homeless and street people.

 Some of the effects of this climatic change were welcomed by people in certain parts of the world. In some states, in India, people had seen snowfall after fifty years and enjoyed the change in the weather. Children playing in snow and throwing snowballs at each other gladdened the hearts of the population.

Of course, major disasters like tsunamis, typhoons, tornados and twisters cause untold damage and destroy everything in their way. However, there is no empiric evidence to relate these disasters with climatic change. Secondly, technology has provided several means of giving warning of these disasters to enable the authorities evacuate people and minimize the damage. Today, the destruction and damage can be reduced, and the loss of human lives can be minimized.

As against this, famines or conditions close to near famines have been reported in some countries, in Africa. These famines cause more deaths than the natural disasters mentioned above. It is essential these countries be allowed to provide arable land and homesteads even if it means extensive deforestation.

Image via Wikipedia

Some countries are using alternative fuels instead of hydrocarbons. In the bargain, they are using millions of bushels of corn which could have been of immense use in food starved countries. Similarly, a few countries leave the land fallow and pay subsidies to the farmers just to ensure remunerative prices to farmers. Even a small country like Korea had consigned millions of apples as cattle food to maintain prices. This is grossly unfair as many countries would have gladly accepted this excess food produced.

The environmentalists come up with catchy slogans. The most popular being, “We have only one earth; let’s preserve it.” The space station maintained for the last few years shows the prospects of opening new areas for habitation in outer space. It is no hyperbole to say that man after finding adequate resources of water starts colonizing other planets in the near future. Earth is not the only planet for man to live in the coming years. The possibilities are immense.

In conclusion, environment needs to be protected but not at the cost of progress. Every nation should find alternative sources for the badly needed energy. The developed nations should take the lead, carry out extensive research and find affordable alternative sources of energy. The responsibility for this rests squarely on their shoulders, as they squandered the earth’s resources initially.

Climate change is dreaded the world over for its effect on the environment and other life forms. For example, it is now widely believed that global warming has caused many cases of species extinctions both in the plant and the animal kingdom. In Australia however, researchers have discovered that global warming has some very surprising effects on the intelligence and adaptive skills of the skink lizards. They were able to conclude that with global warming, some lizard species in Australia have been found to be smarter and more brainy.

The researchers had all along known that lizards hatched from hotter nests were bigger and faster than their peers hatched in cooler nests largely because hotter nests allow for more robust absorption of the egg yolk during their development. However, these scientists did not know that hotter nests also made these lizards more smarter than their peers  the same age hatched in cooler nests.

Lead researcher Joshua Amiel, a seasoned evolutionary scientist came to this conclusion after collecting wild pregnant three-lined skinks and carefully placed their eggs in separate jars under  hot (22 degrees Celsius) and cold (15 degrees Celsius)temperatures. When the eggs were finally hatched, the researchers were able to detect that skink lizards raised in hotter nests were smarter at learning where to find the best hiding spots as they reacted to simulated security threats, a trait that increased their chances of survival in the event of any such actual threats. Those raised in cooler temperatures were slower, disoriented and generally  less clever under the same threats of insecurities from simulated  predators. They would always go the wrong way and remain exposed to danger unlike their peers from hotter nests.

Although climate change would in the long run wipe out even such brainy lizards, especially if temperatures exceed the limits for animal survival, in the short run, these results were very positive findings for the survival of certain reptiles because, for now, it appears that global warming is making some animals species more smarter and the skink lizard is just one such species.

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

Despite rumours to the contrary, global warming is still with us. A report from the U.N. in 2007 stated with a 90% certainty that the major causes of this warming are man-made; so people can take steps to slow this change and combat climate change. In the last 5 years this situation has not changed, although people have continued to take small steps towards reducing their impact on global warming.

There are many things that negative things that could happen as a result of this warming – such as increased flooding of coastal areas due to rising sea-levels, or an increase in water shortages in areas where water scarcity is already a problem. There some benefits that could arise from an increase in the rate of climate change that we can see already, so perhaps there is reason to be positive.

Perhaps the most obvious benefit will be that the coldest areas of the planet, areas such as the Arctic, Antarctic and Siberia; will have milder climates that will allow a greater number of plant and animal species to live there. Unfortunately there are other species such as the polar bear that may cease disappear as their icy habitat is lost. But the loss of Arctic ice will have another positive effect, as the Northwest Passage through Canada’s formerly-icy north opens up to sea transportation, saving thousands of kilometres in transportation distances. This important transport route has been sought after for hundreds of years, but in 2007 the European Space Agency clamed the route was fully clear of ice for the for the first time since records began.

The benefits would not stop there however. Energy consumption in colder areas would be greatly reduced as less heating is needed, and public bodies would not need to spend so much to alleviate the very coldest of the weather. Agriculture could also increase in the coldest areas, and tourism would also benefit as people seek to escape the stifling heat on the rest of the planet.

However people who live away from these remote, sparsely populated areas will find themselves at a significant disadvantage. Those currently suffering the winter cold might look forward to a period of warmer weather, but there are many more disadvantages to climate change than there would be benefits of it. In addition to disadvantages mentioned above, stormy and unpredictable weather would become more widespread; and deaths from extreme heat would also increase.

But if we do not take action against climate would be wise to focus on the few ways that we will improve our living conditions rather than on the many ways that we will make them worse.

Last week the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published a half-page letter entitled “No Need To Panic About Global Warming” above the center fold of its Opinion page. The letter was signed by 16 prominent scientists and claimed, among other things, “Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now.” Such a stark assertion would be devastating to the consensus on climate change if it were true. But it is not true. Data published by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) show that global warming is real and well-documented:

This year tied 1997 as the 11th warmest year since records began in 1880…This marks the 35th consecutive year, since 1976, that the yearly global temperature was above average. The warmest years on record were 2010 and 2005, which were 0.64°C (1.15°F) above average.

While the NOAA report used selected official data sets, the well-known global warming skeptic Richard Muller initiated the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project to re-examine all available data from around the world. The analysis changed his mind. On October 21, 2011, he summarized his conclusions about the reality of climate change, also in the WSJ, in an article entitled “The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism“:

We discovered that about one-third of the world’s temperature stations have recorded cooling temperatures, and about two-thirds have recorded warming. The two-to-one ratio reflects global warming. The changes at the locations that showed warming were typically between 1-2ºC, much greater than the [official] average of 0.64ºC.

The press needs to be open to all streams of opinion. But we learned from the Iraq War, which was based on faulty arguments about weapons of mass destruction, how important it is for the press to note and contradict statements that are demonstrably false. Is it too much to expect the WSJ to have referred to its own October 21st article? A simple note at the end could have alerted its readers to the questionable nature of the statements in the opinion piece it just published so prominently. Instead, the WSJ appeared to endorse the misleading arguments in the “anti-panic” letter by that very prominence. Is some unhealthy editorial agenda at work here? The future of climate change reporting in the WSJ should allow us to answer that question.

Homo sapiens, along with many other living species will disappear in the next century.

Human race at risk of extinction, disappear and many animals. Perhaps already within the next 100 years.

Fenner told “It’s an irreversible situation. I think it’s too late. I try not to express that because people are trying to do something, but they keep putting it off.”

he told Australian journalists whose publication reviews the newspaper Daily Mail.

Frank Fenner said, when mankind has entered into an informal the Anthropocene  called a new geological era, the Earth, which is considered the beginning of the industrial revolution in the production of our planet that had an impact that transcends any ice age or a collision with a comet.

He said: We’ll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter IslClimate change, Frank Fenner, extinction, Homo sapiens and.

“Climate change is just at the very beginning. But we’re seeing remarkable changes in the weather already.”

“The Aborigines showed that without science and the production of carbon dioxide and global warming, they could survive for 40,000 or 50,000 years.

But the world can’t. The human species is likely to go the same way as many of the species that we’ve seen disappear.”

Last year, the official United Nations estimates the world’s 6.8 billion people lived. Predicted that by 2011 the end of humanity will overcome the 7 billion limit.

Frank Fenner argues that the imminent extinction of humanity will be changed climate.

According to his colleague, Professor Stephen Boyden, although some environmentalists in this sense a very pessimistic mood, however, among them there are optimists.

“Maybe Frank is absolutely right, but some of us still cherish the hope that the perceived seriousness of the situation and begin the revolutionary changes in order to ensure ecological balance,” – said Professor Stephen Boyden.

another famous scientist – Professor James Lovelock – has warned that over the next century because of global warming, the world’s human population could fall to 500 million.

He said that any attempt to tackle climate change will not work, only time will win.

Man has been exposed to a more comfortable life and he wants more.  He may have everything he needs to live a better and more comfortable life but he is becoming greedy to the point of wanting more than what Mother Nature can afford.

The environmental disasters that are reported in different countries almost every day should serve as a wake up call to humanity that perhaps, they should now be more considerate of the environment.  Mother Nature may be generous but she can also become angry and vindictive when she has reached the saturation point.

The strong typhoon, earthquake, soil erosion leading to the collapse of residential areas are just some of the common disasters that are actually caused by men.  Illegal logging, the throwing of industrial wastes in the rivers, increased used of un-biodegradable materials are only among the few sins mankind has committed against nature.

Evidence will point out to the fact that environmental retribution will most likely behold mankind soon and he should be prepared for a major disaster brought about by climate change anytime now or in the future.

The issue on the greenhouse effect is not just propaganda in order for environmentalist groups to earn their funding requirement.    Global warming is upon us and this can be gleamed from the major environmental changes like too much heat, too much cold and other phenomenon that mankind is faced with.  

But no matter what mankind does now, he can ever revert global warming; he can only delay it.  What is important is mankind knows the possible effects of climate change and what can be done to alleviate the negative effects.

Climate change can lead to emergencies like the increasing level of the sea water, forest fires and other manifestations.   When this happens, the scientists and world leaders should have an emergency program that they can implement to make sure that lives are not lost and properties are not wasted.

The first thing to do is to launch a massive information campaign to make the whole world aware of what is happening in the environment as a result of climate change.  People should know what to expect in terms of the possible environmental disasters as well as the possible diseases that may be caused by climate change. 

The best emergency preparation kit for people all over the world is knowledge.  Knowledge on what is about to befall them once the effects of climate change becomes manifest in our environment would help societies lessen the brunt of the anger of Mother Nature. 

Every country should prepare for any emergency brought about by climate change.  Even the first world countries that have all the technology would have a hard time facing this disaster.  How much more the third world countries that are not even past the problem of providing food resources for their citizens? 

Every household should be taught how to prepare for climate change emergencies.  They should no longer rely on their governments to see them through the effects of climate change because once that happens, there may be a possibility that even government will become debilitated to act.

Everyone has to act now.  They do not have a choice.

            I.

                        To begin I would like to talk about the aquatic issues Indonesia has faced in the past specifically a decline in fish population starting in the 1970’s.  These large amounts of aquatic deaths were due to contamination of coastal waters by one harmful pesticide used on the nearby rice farms.  And two because of a leaking Japanese supertanker which destroyed the Sumatran coastline.  Because of mass deforestation soil erosion caused silt deposits to cover and kill the coral of the Indonesian coasts.  Deforestation was a serious problem in the 1970’s and 1980’s due to commercial logging which caused soil erosion. 

            Today in Indonesia natural disaster from Tsunami’s and typhoons have ravaged the coast and they seem to be getting worse due to global warming.  Also severe overfishing is taking its’ toll due to advances in fishing technology has pushed fish populations to the brink of depletion.  Deforestation is also a major problem in Indonesia as they are the fastest Southeast Asian country in forest depletion, this causes massive soil erosion.  Also because of forest fire and the burning of forest to create domestic land green house gas emissions have sky rocketed due to carbon sinks being released as the forest are destroyed. 

            To address this challenge of being the third largest green house gas producer in the world Indonesia has brought together ministers from the government non-governmental organizations and technical experts to identify and promote solutions to their strong deforestation problems.  Indonesia is also working to address pollution issues with public disclosure tools; these show the public water pollution performance of companies.  Obviously my country is very concerned with its high pollution levels because it is so pro active and fixing them Indonesia even applied to lead the UN in climate change talks.  On a more domestic level Indonesia has taken initiatives to a mobile air conditioning sector plan, a foam sector plan, and a technical assistance program.  This is all to reduce aerosol emission and the depletion of the ozone. 

II.

            Indonesia has received some attention for its willingness to reduce emissions by twenty six percent after it ratified the Kyoto protocol.

Image via Wikipedia

  Indonesia and World Bank have begun a program for the reduction of emissions from deforestation and degradation and they have also launched the forest carbon partnership facility.  Other deforestation reduction plans are the forest utilization right and the forest resource fee.  Several large NGO’s have began financing the largest coral reef rehabilitation program in the world.  On a more international scale Indonesia has begun preparing the second national communications to the UN framework convention.  This document will include how Indonesia can reduce emissions.  Indonesia also ratified and implemented the Montreal protocol and effectively lowered CFC emission by banning them. 

III.

            Indonesia has been in favor of many environmental policies despite their high emissions.  The supported the carbon tax even though it may cost them as they emit so much green house gas.  Indonesia is also currently the UN’s assistant manager for environmental affairs.  My country also strongly supports the UNFCC they signed this document and ratified it meaning they are bound to the rights and obligations stipulated in the convention.  They also support the cap and trade system and have gone the extra mile by setting a particularly high standard at reducing emissions by twenty six percent.  Indonesia has adopted and ratified a series of International agreements, such as the 1985 Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, and the 1992 United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change.  Specifically Indonesia believes that every country must reduce emissions in some form but the industrialized countries are responsible to have the highest percentage drop as they have the most resources to do so.  The poorer countries should receive as much aid as the UN sees fit to reduce emissions to reach their goal and this aid should come from richer industrialized countries.  Because the rising temperatures could be taking more of a toll on the poorer countries already weak economy due to emissions from industrialized countries.  The agreement calls for the countries and private sectors to monitor their own emissions and report them to the UN.  Indonesia also agrees that a good temperature reduction goal is to not have the temperature rise above two degrees before 2020.

IV.

            Indonesia believes that the leading force for emission reduction should be the global environmental affairs department of the UN.  Because they are responsible for the international cooperation of the world to maintain the environment for all countries.  The non-governmental organizations that are most closely tied to Indonesia re World Bank organization and other large NGO’s.  All nations should be engaged since this is a worldwide problem but specifically china and the U.S. should be because they are the two highest green house gas emitters.  But in general all the industrialized countries seem to be emitting the most and therefore should be more actively engaged in the problem.  But some developing countries in Africa for instance should also be engaged as the effects of climate change could be the most severe in those already harsh regions of the world. 

V.

            Under examination Indonesia seems to have taken an odd approach to these problems because they have begun to lead in emission reduction even though they are a leader in green house gas emissions.  This is contradictory to other heavy emitting countries that seem wary of any regulations and certainly to jump at the chance to set very optimistic goals for emission reduction.  But the difference between Indonesia and those countries is that Indonesia’s economy isn’t based on factory emissions and the real reason its emissions are so high is because of forest clearing which releases carbon sinks.  While stopping this forest burning would slow down their rapid industrialization it wouldn’t complete destroy their economy as there are other less polluting forest clearing methods.  Indonesia also wants global emissions reduced because it has already seen the terrible effects of powerful typhoons and tsunamis and fears the repercussions of climate change creating more frequent ones.