A note from Shannon Panzo, the author, after the fact: It has been brought to my attention that some of the people that read my messages may think this particular article is outside of my character and my usual writing. This suggestion that I am outside my normal objectives is completely wrong. This is why:
First, one of the first premises for this blog is to challenge – a think tank; a pressure cooker for the mind. These have been there since it’s inception.
Second, This was an article meant to exercise your brain. By giving you a compelling argument, you need to not only have plausible answers and directions, but the best answers have fundamental, logical, or progressive foundation to base the comment on. You can see this in my responses. A well written and justified response would get my ‘Kudos’. A half-baked response would usually gain a ‘what if’ or a thought provoking suggestion. A response that was unfounded and didn’t have a basis to stand on was gently brought to the attention of its author (So as not to alienate anyone).
This exercise was not about winners and losers. It was not about what side you are on. It was not about what we must do in the end. It was about response! I wanted to see how people would respond to this article. I obviously struck a few cords. As you THINK about HOW to answer the questions raised, this exercises your mind. It commits you to think outside the square, and causes you to GROW!
In short you could say that I gave you a Brain Building task. So, no, this article is not out of character. It is with the true theme of Mind to Mind – The Brain Accelerator! [Please Read On...]
PS: I also congratulate the people that participated in the challenge by way of your comments. You made my efforts worth while!
Exercise Your Brain…
As I have mentioned in the past, Mind to Mind – The Brain Accelerator, is a place that bring you Mental Puzzles that affect how our lives unfold. By questioning your mind – Why? You stimulate your mental capacity to grow, to strengthen your brain and increase mind power. Consider this a real life applications of your ability to observe and use your brain power.
Absolutely Remarkable!
That is the only thing my observations have revealed about the controversy of Global Warming. For years now, I have observed the media and the politicians led down the merry path “For the good of all”. A path that has more holes in it than aged Swiss cheese. From pollution inhibiting ventures such as the Kyoto Protocol to the Carbon Trading Scheme, there is one thing that has the scientists clutching at straws.
After an alleged 30 year warming trend, since 2001 the temperature has flatlined. All the global warming that should have taken place in the last 8 years has not. On March 2, 2009, Michael Reilly writer for Discovery News reported:
According to a new study in Geophysical Research Letters, global warming may have hit a speed bump and could go into hiding for decades.
Earth’s climate continues to confound scientists. Following a 30-year trend of warming, global temperatures have flatlined since 2001 despite rising greenhouse gas concentrations, and a heat surplus that should have cranked up the planetary thermostat.
“This is nothing like anything we’ve seen since 1950,” Kyle Swanson of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said. “Cooling events since then had firm causes, like eruptions or large-magnitude La-Ninas. This current cooling doesn’t have one.”
Instead, Swanson and colleague Anastasios Tsonis think a series of climate processes have aligned, “conspiring” to chill the climate. In 1997 and 1998, the tropical Pacific Ocean warmed rapidly in what Swanson called a “super El Nino event.” It sent a shock wave through the oceans and atmosphere, jarring their circulation patterns into unison.
How does this square with temperature records from 2005-2007, by some measurements among the warmest years on record? When added up with the other four years since 2001, Swanson said the overall trend is flat, even though temperatures should have gone up by 0.2 degrees Centigrade (0.36 degrees Fahrenheit) during that time.
Discussion:
This is intended to be Part 1 of a Series of Blog Dialogs that I would like to get your input on. I am going to start the ball rolling here:
First, I want to make a statement. I do believe that the human race is slowly destroying the world we live in. I do believe we pollute too much. I do believe we should be proactive in taking stance against pollution.
I do believe that renewable sources of energy have long been put aside for the benefit of the wealth-lust of the entities that make money from the having it the other way – their way. I do believe that there are agendas ongoing that are not revealed to the public. Agendas that would really make most people reconsider which side they stand on.
The largest polluting countries in the world are also the countries that choose NOT to sign onto limiting structures such as the Kyoto Protocol. India, China, the USA, to name a few of the big players.
Another interesting Phenomenon that happened in the past year – The hole in the ozone layer closed over Antarctica. (That’s Nice.) WHY?
Now, even though the inhabitants of Earth have been cutting down forests, polluting at a rate never before experienced (it did still go up), the rise of temperatures have stopped over the last 8 years. Is it time for rejoicing? Of course not. It simply means that our ‘gloom and doom’ scientist have bit off more than they can chew.
A Loud Minority Threatens Clear Thinking
At the same time the scientific community has been split on this matter. Because of a LOUD minority of people causing a landslide of public opinion, the opposing scientists have been in the background, studying the facts and shaking their heads.
Times and Technology Has Changed
There are places on Earth that even today are considered virtually uninhabitable. Since 1970 weather stations have been set up in these normally inhospitable environments, like the deserts. Why only have these places been monitored from the 1970s onward? Because technology allowed us to finally be able to remotely communicate with the stations, through satellites that were not in orbit before then.
Flawed Data May Critically Damage the Studies
Have the studies uninherited the legacy of all these nice hot temperature readings, no. So, as more weather monitoring stations were installed since 1970, the temperature of the Earth increased. Also, during that same period, many more air-conditioned buildings and asphalt surfaces, such as parking lots were placed in cities. The result is localized increase in temperature. Were these temperatures accounted for, no. Even if the studies had been calibrated for them, they are inherently flawed due to the sheer number of what can be erroneous temperature reading from mis-calibrated instruments providing the data.
The reason I mentioned air conditioning is in 1970, it was considered a luxury to have air conditioning. Air conditioning removes heat from inside and transfers it to the outside. The result is local air temperature goes up. Silly, right? Just think what percentage of buildings use air conditioning now compared to 1970.
The Double Edged Sword is Destroyed
A few days ago, NASA launched a one-of Global Climate Monitoring Satellite. It failed to disengage from the rocket and burned up in the atmosphere. The planning stage of this satellite started during the 30 year heat-up. It took years to build. It was destroyed before it could monitor a single temperature to prove, or maybe “DIS-PROVE” that Global Warming is happening at all from man-made sources.
FACT: Every planet in the solar system is heating up right now because the sun is putting out more energy during its natural cycle. Could it be that the recorded temperature differences are just coming from the sun, more than man causing it at this time? Sure, humans indeed are adding to the problem. But maybe, we are the insignificant problem at the moment.
Your Challenge
The gauntlet has been thrown down. By picking it up, you will be enhancing your mind power and increasing your ability to observe, think, and analyze using your brain. Are you up to the challenge?
As I said before, I want you to get involved. I am going to stop at this point. I really do want to know how you feel about all the hoopla. If you are going to take a side, Tell Me Why. I am an observer. I see both sides. I want to know how you feel about this, and why.
Your Question is: Out of a score of 1 to 10, please rank whether a 10 meaning that you agree with the doom-sayers, and we are going to completely and irreversibly wreck our environment within the near future at the current increasing rate of pollution and carbon production, or 1 that it’s a complete fabrication and it’s another money grubbing scheme of special interests groups, or somewhere in between. Please include your reasons why you think this way.
Please Enter your observations in the Comments area.
Categories: 
Tags: 
You have a fierce passion for knowing the truth.
I would like you to ponder a couple of questions. These question are NOT meant to challenge you, or your belief. The challenge is for you to tell me what steps you would take to right the wrong if you were put in charge of the world today.
One of the main issues for the continuous stripping of the natural wealth is the massive population this planet is still supporting – and it keeps growing!
Are you ready to give up all the things you have gained in life? Luxuries like phones, computers, even solar power panels all create pollution of some type. Are you ready to find a cave and hunt for berries to survive? How much of your cushy reality are you willing to change as a beacon to those that would follow in your footsteps.
Remember, “It is harder for a wealthy person to enter Heaven than passing a camel through the eye of a needle.”
I do see you have provided a heart-felt super-suggestion. That has not been lost. I would like to see it done. What will be the ultimate cost? what types of ultimate and unpopular decisions would need to be made to see it through?
I appreciate you allowing me to voice an opinion on a subject that is so huge in its implications as it relates to man’s very existence, now and especially in the future. In deed having a fierce passion for the truth is the driving force to get a person from wondering about something, to knowing about it.
I like the fact that you enjoy getting the mind to work more and more by presenting questions about important subjects. For if you were to try to get people to exercise their mind with inquiries into more mundane and nearly pointless matters, (The entertainment industry has this covered all too well.) there would probably be less emotion, less passionate discussion. And so I would like to indulge you in some answers to questions that you presented in the outset of your thoughtful response.
First I would like to mention that I am not remotely offended by your honest follow up questions. Since they are a logical next step in such an important discussion as to how the reversal of the rapidly depleting earth’s resources and increasing amounts of pollution may be effected. And if a person should be so bold as to make statements such as the ones that you have responded to here, that person in my opinion and no doubt many others would expect such a one to back up their thoughts with facts or known truths and take on the challenge of arguing for their beliefs.
In keeping with the original premise set out in my first posting (Aug. 19th) I must base my thoughts on a known pattern of complete inability by mankind to solve such problems in the past. This past record includes thousands of years, and many many people, men and woman’s no doubt sincere attempt to solve like sized issues. Granted with the relatively recent industrialization of world, the problem can be considered, in comparison to much older ones, to be fairly unique. Nevertheless, this problem has one important similarity with other big issues, the over coming of an impossible hurdle. Now here is an important truth with which there is no real arguing with: There are billions of people on this earth right now. (truth) For global pollution alone to end and be reversed it would require 100% willful compliance on the part of every human on this planet. (truth) So one might honestly ask, ‘What are the chances that billions of people would individually and completely comply with any kind of mandate that could be set out to end pollution?’ And further, the kind of compliance that would be needed to make such an effort stick and not loose ground latter would be that which comes from the figurative heart, the place inside each one of us where any WANT or desire comes from.
The insurmountable challenge then, would be to get every human on this planet to WANT to do things in a way that no longer pollutes. Can this be done? Yes! But not by any of our efforts. Therefore, if you could think of a person that would posses such an amazing influence so as to get every person on this earth to WANT to live in a non-polluting way (including the ones who have become wealthy and influential along with any who may be benefactors of their wealth, namely elements of government), and I am aware of none, then that person could definitively answer how this wrong of pollution may be made right.
Any amount of planning on my part or that of any other human, then, would be wasted time unless the complete compliance of every person on planet earth was to take place.
When it comes to population control, nations differ as to how they view family planning. In developing countries many have the view that the more family members the better. While those in developed nations seem to deliberately curtail child birthing as a means to control family expenses. Getting every family to comply to some kind of family planning with limits in view would be impossible. So, not only would the masses need to be in harmony with this kind of thinking, but the various governments over those people would also have to come to an agreement on this issue. Judging by the last 6000 years or so the record on this looks very bleak.
So, when taking such all inclusive facts into consideration, thus broadening our view so as to see the bigger picture, one can get a more accurate view of the immensity of the problems many would like to tackle and solve. These thoughts are not mentioned for the sake of being negative.
But this bigger picture shows that there are many sincere people who are willing try and tackle this issue with either suggestions, and or actions as to their own personal efforts through sorting glass from plastic, repairing mufflers ect.. But these special people ( the environmentally conscientious sort) whether governments or individuals, are left powerless to see it through.
But what about this idea of trying to lead the way through disconnecting ourselves from our material goods and ‘cushy’ way of life? Well, our cushy way of living may not be as good as we think it is and perhaps we could very well be happier without it. We can easily deduce this since the first human pair enjoyed life in a literal paradise. In fact the name of that place gives us insight as to what kind of place it was. ‘Eden’ means ‘paradise of pleasure’. In this garden like home all of their needs were cared for. They lacked nothing. Every aspect of life for the first human parents was peaceful, enjoyable, free from harmful stress, and naturally mentally stimulating. All of this being enjoyed under ideal weather conditions while perfect food in abundance was available to them. Adam and Eve enjoyed all these things with literally perfect minds and bodies. The fact is this place and time really existed. This is not a dreamed up utopia, but a real part of human history.
Although thousands of years have passed, we as their descendants, still appreciate nature as a place of retreat from our not so natural lives, where its calming effects and simplicity can rejuvenate our souls. Its no wonder. This appreciation was hard wired into us from the beginning.
Its important to note here that it was not man who conceived of a paradise and then placed himself in it. The Creator did! He wanted to share existence with others and so began creating intelligent life, both seen and unseen. He is the most knowledgeable, loving and powerful personage in existence. The inventor of any product would know best how to fix his creation if it was damaged by others right? So we can expect the creator to fully restore earth to its former splendor. Many prophesies point to a time when the Creator will turn his attention to restoring our home to its original beauty.
I will end with this note of an encouraging nature. Here is how we know earth will be restored. First, earth was created and humans placed in a specially prepared place on it. (Genesis account)
(2) Ecclesiastes 1:4 mentions that earth will always be here. (3) Isaiah 55:11 says that everything God sets out to do always comes to completion. No one will stand in His way. ( Much of the bible reveals why were not in paradise now, why there is a large gap between Paradise then and the near future restoration of it.) (4) Psalms 37:29 says the righteous will reside forever on the earth.
Isaiah 65 tells of a future where all on earth will be cared for including sufficient housing, food, and any other necessities provided. The Creator will worry about population control and the use of earth’s resources. (5) Isaiah 45:18 tells plainly that God did not create the earth for nothing (i.e. to be mishandled by its inhabitants and then destroyed) and that it was formed to be inhabited.
Notice that these are scriptures that are taken from the part of the bible that some unfortunately avoid or fail to take seriously. But the fact is these very passages are the ones Jesus would have used, and did directly reefer to during his 3 half year teaching campaign while on earth.
There is hope! But the place to look on an intellectual level is still the wisest, oldest and most available source, God’s word. It is the Creator’s guide for earth’s inhabitants who care.
Doug,
Many thanks for the extended forecast. There are many things that indicate massive changes on the horizon. The list is plentiful.
Thinning of the ozone layer and higher than normal solar activity resulting in higher cosmic radiation reaching the surface, not to mention the hole in the ozone layer over the poles.
Higher than normal Aurora Borealis activity signaling legendary changes.
Religious texts foretelling the end of time (as we know it).
Proof of planetary pole shifts that have brought cataclysmic circumstances.
Antarctica has massive coal reserves – it was a steamy jungle at one time
Planet X,
Black holes,
Aztec Calendar end date,
Prophets foretelling events to come,
… and so on.
What if one or more of these come true in your lifetime? What will you do? Are you going to prepare? Prepare for what? How? We are talking about events that may be so insurmountable that the planet itself may cease to exist.
Do you know why politicians don’t bring up the possibility of these things? See, if you are part of the political machine, you bring up issues like terrorism and global warming as a subject that implies we can actually do something about it. Politicians don’t like to discuss events that could erase everything because they cannot create any perception that they could actually do something to prevent it or to stop it. they don’t like answering questions about things that are just ‘too big’.
So it comes down to you. Are you going to really get upset over something that is completely beyond your control? I’m not.
Syed,
I agree with you to a point. Yes the scientists really do need to be heard. But, they need to be heard without the push-pull of the political environment and slanting reports to their benefactors desire. There are just as many scientists claiming the global warming issue is bunk, but they are the scientists that are being admonished for “THINKING” that way. Where is it written that all scientists must think a certain way? There are too many players outside the scene dictating the script. There are phenomenal amounts of money to be made here!
Of course I want to see us survive and live with the natural beauty the world has,… “In Perfect Harmony…” But this can only be accomplished if it is dealt with truth – on all sides, and NOT with the ambitions of those with political agendas.