“I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts“(Lincoln). The people can achieve anything, but the real problem is for them to know the real cause. If the cause is false, there is nothing they can do. It becomes much worse when the cause is true but whoever is trying to get it to people is not convincing enough. That is why incredible number of problems are not solved, although they existed for centuries. In his speech, Al Gore made a few convincing points, however he lost his audience for the rest of the speech. Rachel Carson, on the other hand, made herself clear and got her point across to thousands of readers across the globe because of the writing techniques she used to convince her readers to take care of the environment.

First of all, her title was “The Obligation to Endure”(Carson). If looked upon, the title carries important information. In some kind of way it confuses reader, however, it does carry the point across. The word “obligation” makes reader think about actions he or she should take in order to help the cause. This means that Carson’s readers are ready to help the cause without even knowing the cause yet. Of course, if she would start talking about everyone starting a war with his or her neighbor, she would probably loose attention of most of people due to the cause. In this case, however, just the title gives her a huge advantage in bringing her point across.

The title of Al Gore’s speech was simply “The Climate Emergency”(Gore). Although, the word “emergency”, uses in this case, helps the person understand the importance of the cause, it does not imply that the person should take an action in order to prevent something from happening. It simply states that the problem exists and someone has to fix it. Not the person hearing the speech, not his or her neighbor, not his or her son or daughter. This means that, although Al Gore was trying to convince people to take an action to prevent global warming, he lost attention of the half of his audience after the first three words of his speech. The people understood the point made, but they did not feel the relation to that point.

Another technique that helped Carson get her point across is the way she presented the point. Instead of showing her audience copious number of pretty pictures charts and graphs, she used the words that would help her readers imagine the impact rather than seeing it. “Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind”(Kipling). Anyone can stand in front of the audience and wave couple shiny pieces of paper in front of their eyes. It doesn’t mean that the audience will understand the point made. However, when a few real life examples are made, the people can relate to them. The people can also paint a picture in their heads which would be hard to erase. If someone shows a person a beautiful picture, that person might be impressed. He or she might show it to everyone around him or her. However, after a few months, the person will forget about the picture. It would not be the same if the person would draw the picture. He or she would than care about the picture, and go back to it day after day.

Same thing happens when someone is trying to convince you about something. The person can show you different graphs, charts, and other media. However, it is much more important that the person would be using the right words. The picture might help, but a wrong word would only hurt the argument. That is why Rachel Carson’s argument is easier to understand and relate to.

Al Gore was trying his best to get the point across, however, he made a huge number of mistakes while doing though. Carson, on the other hand, made herself clear and easy to understand. She gave her readers a chance to relate to the information she was presenting. She made her readers feel the impact instead just telling them about it. She gave some real life examples and facts to make sure that the readers understood the point as well as take action to help the cause.

Works Cited

Carson, Rachel. “The Obligation to Endure.” Reading the World: Ideas That Matter. Ed. Michael Austin. New York: W.W.Norton&, 2010. 425. Print.

Gore, Albert A. “The Climate Emergency.” Reading the World: Ideas That Matter. Ed. Michael Austin. New York: W.W.Norton&, 2010. 454. Print.

Kipling, Rudyard, Miller Fred “Public Speaking and Presentation Quotes.” No Sweat Public Speaking. FeedBurner, 22 Oct. 2010. Web. 27 Nov. 2011. <http://www.nosweatpublicspeaking.com/public-speaking-presentation-quotes/>.

Lincoln, Abraham. “Point Quotes – BrainyQuote.” BrainyQuote. BrainyQuote, 2001. Web. 27 Nov. 2011. <http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/point.html>.

It was also the most important seaway 8 centuries back as it is now, where big trading ships used to transfer merchandize from China, Japan and other countries of the Pacific Ocean to India, Middle East, Europe and African countries. That’s why it is also known as “World’s Seaway”. One of the gates of this seaway is “Malacca”, which is also the city of Malaysia and on the other side is “Sumatra”, the important city of Indonesia.

The cool snowy breeze still blows the same way as used to in 1292, when Marco polo had to settle for five months along with his sea caravan in Sumatra waiting for the settling down of the climate. But even the worst thing that Marco polo had to face was the sea piracy, which he had to face many times. This problems is still alive, but at that time the weapons were not as sophisticated as they are now.

Marco polo writes, “Only 18 people could reach safe and sound to Venice among 600 people. My father and uncle were also among them. Though our clothes were turned into rags but diamonds were still fixed on them, which Kublai Khan had granted us at the time of our departure”.

The Malacca is situated 148 kilometers west of Kuala Lumpur. There is a never endings series of forest between these two cities. The trees in the forest are mainly rubber producing trees. A scar has been made on the tree trunk and a vessel similar to cooking pot has been attached beside that scar for collecting rubber in the shape of thick juice which afterwards turns into rubber.

Rubber is the main export of Malaysia but the arrival of artificial plastic has reduced this export to much extent because of its cheaper rates. The road from Kuala Lumpur to Malacca is not a Motor way rather it is a Highway having very low traffic. Few small cities lie between Kuala Lumpur and Malacca. Malacca in fact is the smallest city of Malaysia. It is totally an autonomous state.

After the renaissance in Europe the adventurers and tourists headed towards East. They were in the search of new worlds and also wanted to earn lot of money. Marco polo, the great traveler had already mentioned in his account of journeys that Europeans were always interested in the treasures.

That’s why the discovery of America, the discovery of the ruins of ancient town of Latin America, search for treasures in Africa and even the search of the remains of pharos are all dependent on the European’s treasure hunt obsession. These adventurers used to go out in search of treasures with the help of old decay maps and marks and saw dreams of becoming rich overnight. They started their search from Portugal and Spain due to the fact that the then Muslim Arab governments who were equipped with the then most modern shipping and sea voyaging techniques, used to teach the inhabitants about these techniques.

This is the reason that the fortune-hunters of the European renaissance spread in the world from these two countries (under the influence of Muslims sea knowledge) and not only ruled the world but also given birth to a new western culture, which is still alive. It can easily be judged now that how big civilization becomes helpful to other, if positively applied instead of mere opposition.

Alfonso de Albuquerque, the famous Portugal’s adventurer of the history, headed this way on 15th April from the newly formed Indian Portuguese colony Goa along with 1200 people and 17 boats. After reaching Malacca, he took control of it till the end of August. Before Alfonso de Albuquerque, Malacca remain under Muslim regime for long, since Arab sailors and traders reached there earlier, spread Islam and set the Muslim regime in this Far East area which was under the ruling of the local Sultans.

Arab’s Muslims were very expert in shipping techniques and thus received much popularity in Spain. They were fully aware of the sea and its passages. Their sharper eyes recognized the importance of the Strait of Malacca and its gateway. They had the sense that for trading from Far East and China through sea, it would be essential taking control of this seaway.

Therefore, Muslims continued ruling over there since 1300 when at last in 1511 Alfonso de Albuquerque took control over there. Alfonso de Albuquerque defeated the then Muslim ruler Sultan Mehmood Shah and turned Malacca into a Portuguese colony. But Portuguese could not get hold of it for long and soon in 1641 Holland captured the Strait after defeating him.

They ruled till 1741 until famous British East India Company got hold of it. Now, Britain had been the Super Power and it was fully aware of the sea secrets. The Britain was preparing to control the world and thus their hold over the strait was essential. The Indian Ocean and the nearby countries was its target. They could get the raw material from there that could run the factories of the new world and new civilization.

Malacca seaway is 805 Km long. It is today considered the most important trading and military center. You can easily guess its importance by a single oil product that around 18 million barrel oil pass through it daily. It would be worth mentioning here that now another island Singapore has gained much trading and military importance on this seaway. Its seaport lies before Singapore.

More than 10 million ships pass through Malacca Strait yearly and more than 1/3 of the trading goods of the world pass through this Strait. America, China, Russia, India, Britain, France and all the nearby countries take care of this Strait, especially American 7th and 6th Sea fleet play an important role in keeping it open, since America is Nuclear Power and have fully ammunition loaded ships and submarines, which remains underwater.

Malacca city have seen the change of ruling nations again and again in the last five centuries. Therefore, besides Muslims Mosques, you can see Churches, and other worship places of Portuguese, Dutch and Britain Style. Similarly, population also consists of many nations, but the majority is of Malay residents who are Muslims, whereas Christian and Sikhs also reside there.

The Malaysian government has taken special care in safeguarding the remains of Portugal, Dutch and Britain so as to make the city more attractive for the tourists, especially for the European tourist. That’s why European tourists are seen here and there visiting the city happily.

Perhaps the most attractive thing in the tourist industry can be that there would be something present for the foreigners that could help them bringing close to their civilization.  That’s why the Muslims countries who have kept the ancient reminiscences safe are earning pounds, dollars, Euros and Yen from them and making their countries prosperous. If the Nation has confidence, the old remains cannot harm its identity. These old remains are the gateway of the history and even if destroyed, they will remain safe in the books.

Malacca is a small city. The most interesting center of it is an old castle named “A’ Famosa”. It is a reminiscence of Portuguese age. Seemingly it depicts the Western Civilization, but people who are aware of the construction art, can see the glimpse of Spanish Muslims art in it as well. Malacca city is situated on both sides of the River Malacca. There is so wonderful panorama of old and new buildings that cannot be found elsewhere in Far East or South East Asia. That’s why UNESCO titled it as “The Great Work of Global Heritage”. Another wonderful thing is that all the people of different nations and religions are living there very peacefully. Any type of anarchy is extinct here. A’ Famosa castle might remained the center of war sometime in the past but today it is the most attractive place for the world’s tourists, because all kinds of facilities like Hotels and Theaters etc. are present here under one roof.

Turning of military castles into economic castles is common in today’s world. It is common in Europe as well. This custom has been adopted my many developed Muslim countries that has opened the gates of employment and earning foreign exchange. These castles are also a wonderful source of bringing coordination and harmony among nations. But, unfortunately, weak, frightened and nervous nations think it their great feat destroying such type of castles and others alike ancient reminiscences.

Alfonso de Albuquerque, after collecting treasures and wealth from Malacca returned back to Goa. The name of the ship he was traveling in was “Flor Do Mar”, which sank in the Indian Ocean due to heavy storm with all his wealth and treasures. The model of this ship has been kept at one of the crossings of Malacca so that every visitor must see and take advice from it.

Malacca city has a great contribution in spreading Islam in the Far East, since Muslims traders and merchants from India and other Muslim countries came there for trading purposes and also brought their civilization and religion with them. Great number of Malaya people accepted Islam in 1500.

Although it was ruled most of the time by Portuguese, Dutch and Britain but the majority is of Muslims. Islam spread to all over Malaysia from there and the ancient Mosques are witnessing about it even today.

The Malacca beach is unique in its beauty and tidiness. Blue sea is seen just in front, the bright sand and high cleanliness makes the beach captivating. Its beach has now gone farther from the sea as land has been taken to make room for the inhabitants, but the natural beauty of the beach has not been reduced even an inch.

The same strong wet winds of the age of Marco polo give visitors a new feel of freshness. These winds are blowing from America, Japan, Australia, China or Indian Ocean. Really a small city of Malacca and its Strait that joins many parts of the world is now among one of the wonders of Nature.

By Muhammad Irfan Zafar

Content Writer

Looming as a spectre above the world, climate change has presented itself as a pertinent phenomenon that requires attention from governments today. Yet, climate change should not be seen as a novelty, for it has occurred naturally since the start of time. It is only now that climate change has been prioritised at many international forums due to the accelerating rate of change in the natural world that humans find themselves ill-equipped to manage. The multitude of hurricanes and the prevalence of droughts that have devastated many parts of the world in the past decade are illustrative of the colossal scale of the problem that we have before us today. Though it is now time for leaders of the world to act swiftly and incisively upon this matter, we have instead been left with a plethora of unsuccessful conferences and a dearth of any real, concerted action to manage climate change. However, the mitigation of detriments brought about by climate change has still been evident on many international platforms at which its members have a far larger stake in climate change than the rest of the world. It is up to these nations to make obvious that our international community has not yet failed utterly in dealing with climate change.

        It is true to a significant extent that overly ambitious conventions and poorly conceptualised treaties have been an impediment to the way which the international community has chosen to deal with climate change. This is exemplified by the Kyoto Protocol, which was our largest, ostensibly concerted attempt to date to deal with climate change. Widely acclaimed as the global solution and blueprint to slow down the rate of climate change and global warming in its initial stages, the Kyoto Protocol presented a series of plans to reduce carbon emissions of all signatory countries. This plan sounds clever, at the onset, till we realised that the United States, the world’s largest emitter of carbon gases, was reluctant to ratify the treaty. The overly ambitious terms set out in the Protocol would require the USA to suffer considerable detriment to its economy if it were to be implemented. Hence, the lofty ambitions of those who crafted the protocol have proven to be inimical for its adoption by many member states, because it is too tall an order to be reached.

        Another argument for the failure of these international conventions, as a natural consequence of excessive expectations and ambitions, would be their poorly conceptualised nature. These unrealistic approaches negate the effectiveness of our conventions to turn our dream of a naturally healthy world into reality. Looking once again at the Kyoto Protocol, we can find a significant fault in its classification system of countries, which determine how much obligation is placed on countries to reduce its emissions. It does so using the Annex 1 and Annex 2 classification, placing developed nations in the Annex 1 grouping and burdening them with high goals of emissions reduction, while placing non-developed and developing nations in Annex 2 and having only to meet a fraction of the goals of the former group. This system is fundamentally flawed for its assumption that it is the rich who are responsible for climate change. The placing of China and India in Annex 2, despite their being the world’s 3rd and 4th biggest emitters at that time, elucidates its weakness. A detachment from reality and broader considerations similar to the Kyoto Protocol have been identified as issues in other international “efforts”, such as the entire system of carbon trading. The success of international efforts to control climate change hence hinges precariously on these poor plans, often resulting instead in disappointment and disillusionment.

        The planners of these international conventions cannot always be blamed though, because obstructing these plans themselves are the large and influential nations and their self-interests. While it has been echoed countless times that all countries have an equal stake in fighting climate change, it remains true that no country acts solely upon its obligations to the rest of the world, for its cardinal consideration still rests upon the protection of self-interest. That being said, it would only take the doubt of one or two superpowers to throw any plan or convention into disarray. As discussed earlier, the USA refused to be a party to the Kyoto Protocol due to its economic considerations and its dissatisfaction with the relative freedom of border granted to China and India. In a more relevant case, the Copenhagen Summit was brought to a disappointing denouement due to China’s stone-walling at the talks, and its insistence that it would not forgo economic growth despite environmental concerns. It is apparent from the above two examples that the effectiveness of any convention or conference can be stalled by an incompliant nation which refuses to forsake its interests for the greater good, because in its eyes, it is not the greater good that it seeks.

        However, despite the innumerable instances of failure by the international community to come together and tackle climate change in a concerted fashion, we should take joy in the small but significant actions undertaken by individual nations themselves because only by celebrating them can we earn the support of the larger community. In recent years, there have been many attempts made at bringing attention to climate change by smaller nations. These smaller nations in question often have a large stake in the issue of climate change, which is immediately apparent in the case of the Maldives. Scientists have prognosticated that in fifty years time, more than half of the Maldives would be under sea water due to rising sea levels brought about by the rapid increase in global temperatures. The realisation that the future of this small island lay in the hands of the same leaders who were quibbling at the Copenhagen Summit was alarming enough to galvanise action. The president of Maldives has gathered support of other islands that face similar futures, such as Tuvalu and Saint Kitts of Nevis to form the Alliance of Small Island States. The Alliance has been increasingly vocal in voicing their predicted plight to the international community and it has worked. Many larger nations have now recognised the worries of these island-states and are lending considerable support to their movement. A corollary of this would also be the larger countries’ realisation that, soon enough, they would be heading in a similar direction. If global temperatures were to rise at this continuous rate, many parts of the Netherlands would find themselves lying dangerously below sea level before the next century. Hence, the efforts of smaller countries have often manifested themselves in significant movements that advance the international community’s efforts towards combating climate change.

        The perception that combating climate change must be detrimental to our economy is a misinformed one. Rather, parts of our world have found many economic benefits in employing creative methods to deal with climate change and this mutually beneficial arrangement makes everyone happy. Increasingly, governments around and in Europe have implemented Feed-in-Tariffs systems to combat climate change by promoting the use of carbon energies. This system promises government subsidies for civilian installations of renewable energy production, such as solar PV panels and windmills. Not only does this help reduce a country’s reliance on carbon energy, it also stimulates the renewable energy sector of the economy, a sector brimming with potential for the future. The success of Germany’s venture into this field can be seen in its increment of 31 percent in the usage of renewable energy in just 3 years, from 2006 to 2009. This has led to many government initiatives in Britain, Spain and Denmark, where strong winds are aplenty. These individual adoptions of renewable energy have resulted in a movement in Europe that has the potential to revolutionise the way governments choose to implement climate change policies. Therefore, this has made the European Union more attuned to the steps that its member states are undertaking to fight climate change with renewable energy, finally giving this issue the attention it deserves. Hence, the multifarious approaches that are innovatively taken up by individual governments have the unintended consequences of beginning a movement that is beneficial towards our efforts of controlling climate change.

        In conclusion, the past repeated failure of the international community in dealing with climate change has no doubt made the small but innovative and poignant movements described above seem like a drop in the ocean. Though small, they are nonetheless significant for they represent the beginnings of the concerted effort stemming from the contributions of individual governments. As history undoubtedly shows, these small efforts built up from the international community often go a longer way in solving the problem of climate change than the ambitions and colossal undertakings of the global community. Although international efforts to deal with climate change have been an utter failure till today, the promising signs of change from the international community suggests a better tomorrow for climate change.

        Efforts to stem the tide of climate change are ineffective today because of the prioritisation of pragmatic self-interest. One of the central tenets of economics is the concept of opportunity cost. To get something, one has to lose a set amount of something else. In the case of climate change, the goal is to reduce carbon emissions. However, achieving that costs money, manpower and time, priorities which governments and companies alike are unwilling to sacrifice. When dealing with a phenomenon such as global warming, whose effects have none of the immediacy of a bomb blast as with terrorism, it is difficult to convince anyone to make the incredibly and seemingly unrealistic altruistic tradeoff of dedicating money and time to invest in eco-friendly goods for gains that they can barely feel. To date, major polluters such as China, whose levels of pollution have now overtaken the US, have not cooperated fully, and they cannot be blamed. Cutting down on pollution at an industrial level costs too much and is too difficult to enforce for developing countries without compromising economic growth. Thus, where the politics of poverty is considered, where investing in green alternatives is a laughable prospect for those who can barely feed themselves, the failure of environmental initiatives such as the Kyoto Protocol is understandable as going green is simply not worth the price. Throughout all these failures, the pragmatic self-preservative reflex runs like groundwater. Though research into green technology and initiatives to promote it has progressed, it does not mean the world is buying it. The problem here is under-utilisation of solutions to pollution due to an almost selfish prioritisation of material benefit, which renders most efforts to promote going green ineffective.

        The global campaign against climate change is also inadequate due to technological limitations. While green technology has taken great steps forwards, it is still too expensive to implement on a large scale. The technology itself is present. Fuel cells and solar panels and ubiquitously known as clean power sources, but the technology required for their mass implementation is not. To date, there have been no known efficient methods of mass-producing hydrogen for fuel cells, and solar panels continue to be among the priciest of power sources. A large solar panel farm costs roughly as much as a coal power plant and produces far less electricity. The problem with green technological solutions is how to make them economical, something science hasn’t quite accomplished yet. Hence, implementations of these technologies tend to be sparse and small in scale, making potentially workable solutions completely inadequate.

        However, looking past the panic, the technology and the numbers, is it realistically possible to prevent climate change entirely? The answer is no. Industry comes with the unfortunate side effect of pollution. To bring emissions to a safe level would boil down to a choice between returning humanity to early industrial age levels of production or restructuring industry from the ground up to depend solely on green technology. Both are unfeasible. The first is obvious. For the second, in a time where each of these last two decades have featured at least one major economic crises, realistically, countries would not have the resources to enact such sweeping change short of declaring a state of total war on pollution.

        So what should we do them? The answer: what we are doing now. The progress is slow, and measures are neither entirely effective nor adequate. We are nowhere near preventing climate change, and our efforts typically fall far short of the mark. But we can lay claim to one shred of pride, and it is that we are on the right track to success. Green technology is on the rise, and is making slow but steady progress in the industry. Hybrid cars such as the Toyota Prius have been released to optimistic sales, and are now a standard feature in the automobile market. It has been but decades since we first began to tackle the problem, and in these decades we have taken strides, deliberate and firm, towards building a world free from emissions. Ineffective policies, inadequate resources and technology and expected roadblocks that will be removed with time and progress. The methods may not be perfect, but generally, we are moving in the right direction, and what steps we’ve taken, we’ve taken within our means.

        To conclude, attempts at preventing climate change currently host a string of flaws, and have yet to live up to their potential. However, with the gradual progress made in promoting green practices and technology, the future looks bright. The only question is: can we do it in time? The clock is ticking.

Climate Change and Global Warming has become uncontrollable. Due to excess carbon from factories and nuclear power plants the Earth is warming up faster than it should be. Humans have to be as economical as possible to ensure to have a sustaining life for the human race.

On the 28th of February 2008, the Ross Ice Shelf started to melt away. In another 7 hours and ten minutes, ice glaciers from behind became unsteady as the ice that used to be there to hold them wasn’t there anymore. Slowly the ice began to melt and float away into the ocean. After two and a half weeks most of the ice had been spread on the water ready to float up north and melt away into water.

Climate Change is a negative impact. People should stop using devices such as cars or electronics to help the human race sustain a long living. Human could use renewable energy instead of coal so we could live on some resources for longer. If technology starts to increase dramatically and more and more carbon is being polluted into the air, Ice Shelves in Antarctica and Greenland will start to melt. This in turn will cause the sea level to rise and flood islands such as Maldives, Kiribati and Vanuatu. To avoid this disaster, we need to make sure that we live economically to the world.

One day, many ice shelves will start to melt and most of the land on Earth will be covered expected for some of the mountain ranges and high peaks of the world. This will either cause humans to live on hovering objects or to somehow manage themselves in mountain areas. Cannibalism will start and the human race will become like the animals.

Fatih Birol is a name unfamiliar to many, but this chief economist at the International Energy Agency has issued a stark warning that so many fossil-fuelled power stations and other environmentally unfriendly buildings are liable to appear over the next five years that the last chance of affecting climate change in any way will be forever lost.

In the most thorough world energy infrastructure analysis to date, it has become clear that such expansion will be the single factor producing an irreversible effect on climate change, with potentially disastrous results.

Scientists maintain that the safe maximum limit of 2C of warming is only sustainable with CO2 emissions of at most 450 parts per million in the atmosphere.

Since the current levels are already at 390, humanity has an ever-narrowing window of opportunity for getting the global economy as a whole on to a low-carbon footing. As things stand, with countries like India and China becoming ever more affluent, consumer demands are making such ambitions highly unrealistic.

At current trends by 2017, that danger figure of ceiling of 450 will have been reached or breached, and the door to genuinely being able to impact on climatic catastrophe will be closed forever. In spite of this imminent disaster, world governments are about to postpone negotiations about a successor to the 1997 Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012.

Many countries apparently now favour postponing talks until 2018, including the UK, Japan and Russia. Not that the problem is particular to the developing world, because throughout the developed world there are plans for fossil-fuelled power stations contributing significantly to future global emissions.

These have risen a record amount in 2010, a record 30.6 gigatonnes of CO2 from burning fossil fuels, 1.6Gt higher on the previous year, and new building of energy and industrial infrastructure will cause even = higher emissions for the foreseeable future.

Increasing emissions are certain to result from the abandonment of nuclear energy, the Fukushima disaster in Japan making governments nervous. Turning away from nuclear energy will doubtless result in much higher emissions globally. China is the world’s biggest emitter, and by 2035 will be outpacing the rest of the world combined.

Urgently needed direction change is in evidence in global energy trends is under way, but whether it is too little, too late remains to be seen. It is clear that  decisions made today risk passing a carbon debt to the next generation so massive that they pay a very heavy price for it.

Governments meet again soon in Durban for the next round of global climate talks, but since the two biggest culprits, China and the USA, are intractable about their respective positions on this issue, chances are that the future generations of the human race will be forever resentful of our lack of action.  Mother nature is far older than man, and she always has the last word.

We’re beginning to feel the effects of climate change around the globe.

Reasons of climate change:

I think the biggest problem are people who waste natural resources. Consumerism (our increasing want for material things) has increased too fast.

To prevent climate change, you will have to do your part and learn to live a green life. Electricity, automobiles, and all carbon emissions are the main causes of climate change.

In my opinion there are several ways you can help prevent climate change for example: To prevent climate change, start recycling plastic bottles instead of just throwing them away. You can also recycle paper, like newspapers. Before you throw something away, stop and think about whether it could be used again, or if it could perform a different but useful function.

Some people do not believe in climate change or do not even care but think about your children and their children. If we don’t start protecting the planet, future generations won’t have a beautiful planet to experience life on.

In 2011 the Environmental Protection Agency started regulating carbon dioxide as declared a dangerous pollutant. This action is the epitome of stupidity since the notion of carbon dioxide being an air pollutant I totally absurd.

Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring atmospheric gas. It is exhaled by people and animals and used by plants. In fact plants thrive more when CO2 levels higher. Furthermore carbon dioxide is not dangerous; you breathe it in and out in every breath of your life.

Carbon dioxide is not only a naturally occurring gas in Earth’s atmosphere but it seems to be the must naturally occurring gas for terrestrial planetary atmospheres. The Solar system has three terrestrial planets with substantial atmospheres two of them Mars and Venus have predominately carbon dioxide atmosphere. Even Earth would have a nitrogen / carbon dioxide atmosphere if it were not for plants producing lots of free oxygen. So once again carbon idea of dioxide being a pollutant is absurd.

Your about to say well what about global warming or climate change or what ever the latest term may be. Well even if you ignore the fact that the computer models used to support man caused global warming make the thermodynamically impossible assumption that as the global temperature raises the amount of heat lost to space is reduced. If you also ignore the Climate Gate emails that show that climate data has been manipulated.

If you ignore all this and take global warming proponents at their word, they are only predicting rise in temperature comparable to that of the Medieval Warm Period. The Medieval Warm Period was actually beneficial allowing the Vikings to reach America and helping Europe recover from the black plaque and producing increased food production and prosperity.  So once again carbon idea of dioxide being a pollutant is absurd.

So why has the EPA made this step. It has to do with Cap and Trade. President Obama tried to get congress to pass Cap and Trade; a scam that would enrich those behind the plan at the expense of the U.S. economy. After congress refused to pass Cap and Trade seeing as a job killer during a time of high unemployment President Obama used the EPA to do get it by way of regulation. The EPA ruling carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant is President Obama’s way of doing this.

References

Thermodynamics In Physics

Global Warming Fraud and Its Affect on Science

Science corrupted – YouTube

The Hockey Stick: A New Low in Climate Science

Climategate: Dr. Tim Ball on the hacked CRU emails – YouTube

British scientists have pulled back from geoengineering projects, realising that trying to tinker with nature can have disastrous unforeseen consequences but the US is forging ahead with plans to re-engineering the planet’s ecosphere.. UK scientists last week “postponed” one of the world’s first attempts to physically manipulate the upper atmosphere to cool the planet. Okay, so the Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering project wasn’t actually going to spray thousands of tonnes of reflective particles into the air to replicate a volcano right now, but the plan to send a balloon with a hose attached 1km into the sky above the south eastern county of Norfolk was the first step towards that ultimate loonytoons techno-fix for climate change.

The reason the British scientists gave for pulling back was that more time was needed for consultation. In retrospect, it seems bizarre that they had only talked to a few members of the public. It was only when 60 global groupswrote to the UK government and the research groups behind the project requesting cancellation that they paid any attention to critics. These crazy science heads you see were planning to eventually put sulphur compounds in the stratosphere. Yeah, sulphur, you know the stuff that we spend millions on extracting from power station emissions so it doesn’t get into the atmosphere. Put it up there, it makes acid rain which did so much damage to forests in the 1970s and 80s. The damage by putting sulphur in the atmosphere is what caused most governments in industrial nations to pass laws requiring coal and oil power stations to filter the sulphur out of emissions before they are released into the atmosphere. And the insanity of putting the same stuff into the atmosphere as we spend so much effort and money on taking out has dawned on the British scientists. To be fair it has dawned on a lot of US scientists too, you will have seen their names traduced on Warmageddonist blogs. The Goldman Sachs puppet U.S. President, Barack Obama remains loyal to his pledge to trash the environment for the benefit of his corporate paymasters implement green energy policies so we must hope the 2012 Presidential election returns a President who understands the issues.

At the moment US geoengineering enthusiasts are still gung-ho. Just days after the British got cold feet, the Washington-based think tank the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) published a major reportcalling for the United States and other like minded countries to move towards large-scale climate control experimentation. Trying to rebrand geoengineeringas “climate remediation”, the BPC report is full of precautionary rhetoric, but its bottom line is that there should be presidential leadership for the nascent technologies, a “coalition of willing” countries to experiment together, large-scale testing and big government funding.

What is this BPC and should we take the allegedly non-profit group seriously? For a start these guys – and they are indeed mostly men – are not bipartisan in any sense that the British would understand. The operation is part-funded by supranational and in many ways extra-national corporations big oil, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies are involved, corporate entities with enough financial clout to enable them to manipulate markets and governments and effectively place themselves above the law. While it claims to  represent a consensus among what have historically been divergent views it appears to actually represent the most powerful US academic, military, scientific and corporate interests. It lobbies for free trade and unconstrained corporate power.

The specially convened BPC task force is in fact the elite of the emerging academic, science and military-led geoengineering lobby with a few pseudo neutrals (neutral in the sense they represent no vested interests but will say anything they are paid to,) thrown in to give it an air of political impartiality. It includes former ambassadors, an assistant secretary of state, academics, UN representatives and a chief US climate negotiator. Notable among the group is David Whelan, who spent much of his career in the US defence department working on the stealth bomber and nuclear weapons and who now leads a group of people as Boeing’s chief scientist working on “ways to find new solutions to world’s most challenging problems”. Well his involvement should have the planet loving Warmageddonists creaming their pants. Stealth bomber and nuclear weapons experts linking up to save the planet.Their conversion must have been quite a show for travellers on the road to Damascus.

The party also includes several of geoengineering’s most powerful academic cheerleaders. Atmosphere scientist Ken Caldeira, from Stanford University, used to work at the National laboratory at Livermorewith the people who developed the ill-fated “star wars” weapons (notice a pattern emerging here?). Together with David Keith, a researcher at the University of Calgary in Canada, who is also on the BPC panel, Caldeira manages billionaire Bill Gates’s geoengineering research budget. Both scientists have patents pending on geoengineering processes and both were members of of the UK Royal Society’s working group on geoengineering which in 2009 recommended more researchas the science, far from being settled, was uncertain and lacking substance in many areas. Keith has a company developing a machine to suck CO2 out of the air and Caldeira has patented ideas to stop hurricanes forming. Beware here of populist authoritarianism, geoengineering is the penultimate scientific and political control freakery, the ultimate being the push that will (not might but will) come to ensure every new human being on the planet is created in a test tube.

One of the projects the Wannabe Gods Geoengineering science community is pushing very hard is the pumping of millions of tonnes of Sulphur compounds into the upper atmosphere. This article at Wikipedia (which I have checked against more reliable offline sources) discusses the idea objectively and suggests in the case of this idea for halting allegedly CO2 driven climate change the cure is likely to be worse than the disease.

Earlier in the article it was noted that the effect climate scientists hope to achieve by pumping these nanoparticles of sulphur compounds into the stratosphere will be to simulate a volcanic winter like the one following Mount Tambora’s eruption in 1815 the biggest volcanic eruption in recorded history, or the one that followed the eruption of Krakatoa in 1883. Both these had such a huge global impact Tambora inspired Lord Byron to write the poem Darknessand historians to dub 1816 the year without a summer. Karkatoa has provided the story for several films , television dramas and many books. The effects of those volcanic winters are well documented.

Let’s hypothesize here. Suppose while the clever – clever boys and girls in white coats with their scientific method of not bothering to think through the possible consequences were busy pumping sulphur into the atmosphere we had a big volcanic eruption like Tambora, Karaktoa or the one on Santorini around 1650 BC that almost wiped out the Minoan civilisation. How big an environmental disaster would that be? Bigger by far, according to predictions that a couple of degrees increase in the average global temperature.

Consider the other big idea on the table at the moment, machines to suck CO2 out of the air. CO2 is food for plants, ever heard of the natural process of photosynthesis by which plant life turns light, carbon dioxide and water into tissue, leaves, stems, fruit and seeds. The more CO2 there is in the air the better the crop yield. Doubling the proportion of CO2 in the air would do more to solve food shortages than Genetically Modified crops ever could (to feed the world we need more CO2 not GM crops). So removing CO2 from the air is potentially harmful.

The problem with experiments like this is they are only testable in real conditions or by computerised mathematical models. We cannot create a real environment under controlled conditions in a laboratory. And as we all know the outcomes of mathematical modelling projects differ widely from what happens in reality.

One final point. Anyone remember that big environmental scare of the 1970s and 80s, acid rainThe acid rain caused by sulphur laden emissions from coal and oil fired power stations destroyed large acreages of forest in Scandinavia, Northern Europe, Russia, USA and Canada. The progress is that as the sulphur compounds (mostly sulphur dioxide) fall to earth they are dissolved in water vapour. This condenses as mild sulphuric acid but because the ecosphere is such a delicate system even the changing of mild carbonic acid (normal rain) to mild sulphuric acid can cause disaster. Vegetation is not evolved to deal with the effects of sulphur in the atmosphere.

All that is of no concern to a scientist in pursuit of a research grant or Nobel prize. They aren’t concerned with the damage they may do decades down the line, only with fame, wealth and power NOW! Unfortunately such scientists have the ear of politicians and any hint of vast profits to be made from risk free ventures like picking the pockets of taxpayers will always grab the attention of financiers and investors.

Ironically the people cheer leading for this Brave New World call themselves liberals.

In sum, this coalition of US led expertise and financial clout is a small group of people, the new elite, who sensed there were vast profits to be made  for their institutions and companies in geoengineering and don’t give a gnat’s fart if they trash the planet and murder millions in the process. And as long as there is money, hospitality and awards to be had the science academics will go along, happily producing the answers their paymasters want. Meanwhile we mere mortals have a simple choice. Keep on with the consumerism and contribute to our own enslavement or simply cut back wherever we can on our lifestyle which will have the double effect of being good for the environment and starving governments of the tax revenues needed to fund the crazy projects proposed by people who want to play God.

Watch out. This could be the start of the next generation of climate wars. And this time it might turn into a real shooting war.

RELATED POSTS:
Iceberg Alley Blues
Climate Change – The Edge Of The Abyss
Peccavimus
The Cost Of Going Green
The Climate Science Scam
Wind Turbines – The Truth
Climate Change and population growth
Climate change; crooks and liars at work
Some clarity of thought amid the climate change cacophony
Climate change, corruption and conflicts of interest
Green Scaremongering
When did scientists become so intolerant of differing opinions

Speaking in Edinburgh, former US vice-president Gore said a fork in the road had been reached, the evidence from the floods in Pakistan, China, South Korea and Columbia so compelling that combating carbon emissions had become the top priority for humanity.

Real world observations, he stated, made it clear that failure to act immediately meant a catastrophe would be inevitable, nearly every climate scientist actively now agreeing that a causal link between global, sharp increases in extreme weather undoubtedly existed.

Urgent action being vitally important is now an indisputable need, because the environment in which storms form has dramatically altered, global hydrological cycles altering through atmospheric and oceanic warming.

With far more water evaporating, to be atmospherically stored as water vapour, amounts of this are 4% higher now than a generation ago. especially in the tropics. This has been a major factor, without doubt, for the incidence of ever heavier and more violent storms, displacing many millions of people around the world this year.

Among the dreadful effects of this phenomena are far more wildfires, increasing agricultural land desertification and Amazon river levels fluctuating wildly in the. While close to 400 million worldwide were victims of drought, many global locations recorded highest daytime temperatures ever recorded

Global Insurers state that they feel indisputably that climate change could be the only plausible explanation for rapid rises in extreme weather events. Al Gore said, and who could argue the point, that the

younger generation needed to be demanding and initiating positive action by world leaders on a massive scale.

 At least in Scotland the emphasis on tidal, wave and wind power show a high degree of moral courage which others needed to adopt with equal vigour, new renewable technologies hopefully making a successful shift possible from fossil fuel dependence. This is, without a doubt, the time that all of us really need to re-visit the dread predictions given in the course of that incredible Inconvenient Truth video, because part II is now a very real and present danger for the whole of the human race.