Film Title: An Inconvenient Truth.

On the fence about global warming? Me too, and who wouldn’t be, given the voluminous amount of material published by disbelievers of what Al Gore termed his ‘inconvenient truth’. However, like Al Gore or not, if you look at the scientific data on global warming, presented from numerous angles by scientists without bias, it’s hard not to be afraid. Very afraid.

Jay Taylor recently interviewed two people with serious credentials in the scientific community to get to the bottom of global warming. CEO.CA was turned on to the interview by Brent Cook, a highly respected exploration geologist, well known for his sometimes surprising candor, and a great guy. Brent was one of Jay’s guests, and the other was Naomi Oreskes, who is a ‘historian of science’. Naomi’s credentials are too numerous to list; suffice it to say she is Stanford PHD, teaches at Harvard, has authored books and papers on climate change, and is a TED speaker.

Taylor’s interview was very interesting. After listening to it I came away with the following conclusions:

Global warming is a fact, and there is a mountain of scientific evidence to support it

All the scientific data shows that since the 60’s there’s been a consistent warming trend, and although the increase in the global temperature is minuscule, it will have powerful consequences.

Greenhouse gas emissions are a big contributor to global warming

There is overwhelming scientific data (much of it from NASA) that CO2 emissions (aka greenhouse gas emissions) are up 40% since the industrial revolution. Scientists know that levels of CO2 emissions and global temperatures track. Whether one precedes the other is irrelevant.

The naysayers of global warming are cherry pickers

The subject of global warming is one of great debate; believers and non-believers are often philosophically entrenched, rather than scientifically influenced. Oreskes says global warming is a ‘bad news’ story that people don’t want to believe, so they look hard for evidence to dispute it. They ‘cherry pick’ bits and pieces of data to support their case.

The only data that should be considered relevant to the discussion of global warming is scientific data, published in ‘peer review’ journals.

If you’re simply searching the internet for information about global warming, you’re making a mistake, according to Oreskes. Scientific research published in ‘peer review’ journals is heavily scrutinized by the scientific community. The ‘peer review’ process weeds out what real from what is not. And if you look at scientific data there is NO argument that global warming is real, and it’s being largely driven by greenhouse gases.

Our friend Brent Cook agrees. He’s an objective thinker who has seen first hand an increase in explorable ground opened up by receding ice sheets. He agrees that all too often people’s opinion of global warming is just that: opinion.

Source: Jay Taylor Media