Have you ever studied statistics? What about science? And, what about meteorology? My guess is most of us have to say no to at least two out of the three. And, yes, these are relevant questions. Think about how you come to your opinions if you don’t understand something. Well, how do you? It comes through the TV, over the radio, or on the internet, and you choose whether you think it’s right by how well you trust the source.

So, if we only make our opinions by what we can trust from other people, the argument isn’t about global warming at all. It’s about who you trust. Now we’ve really got a problem. Because the people that are out there, “reporting” all this stuff to us, only stand to gain if we get involved in all the excitement.

Face it: Al Gore has gained more popularity by pushing “Global Warming” and “Climate Change” than he would ever have gained as President. He has started multiple organizations, groups, and efforts to stop this global warming.

In fact, even if all the facts were against him, do you think he would turn back? Really? He has thousands, maybe millions of supporters. He would lose every single one of these fanatics if he ever stepped away from his position. Now there’s a reason to stick to your guns, especially if you’re a politician!

In all reality, there is plenty of scientific evidence against global warming. However, there is also evidence for it. So who do you believe? Well, obviously, we believe the person from our party, or the one who we think is the most genuine, or the one we trust. And since Democrats have espoused Global Warming as the next big issue, and Republicans have ignored climate change, we have our political split drawn up for us. Now we sit around and argue about something that 95% of us don’t understand, and quote folks who are talking about this and don’t even understand it either!

Ok, I heard you back there. You want me to prove that there is evidence against global warming. To answer, I will give you some links, and some theories. The first link is to an article on forces.org. http://www.forces.org/Forces_Articles/article_viewer.php?id=516

This article explains how a CBS program was wrong in the way it presented news regarding global climate change. For my opinion why, I suggest you read this hub: http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Media-Drive-Through-Would-you-like-to-Supersize-that-Catastrophe-today--sir.

Essentially, it made more sense for them to give an unbalanced viewpoint, because it gave them more viewers and reinforced their viewpoint. A balanced viewpoint on the climate change issue would have undermined their credibility, since people no longer regard news sources as neutral in the political exchange, and they need to be polarized to gain viewers.

Here is what seems to be a neutral article (although it will appear to be very biased to those who believe in Global Warming). http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/02/03/global-warming-101-science/

Furthermore, many people agree that global warming is happening, but that we aren’t causing it. Fair enough. Did you know that cows give off methane, producing 18% of this global warming? http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=2723201

Here’s another link for you to check out, as well as a quote to make you mad (if you believe in global warming) “After being in the defense industry and working with several engineers and scientists in the field, I have come to the conclusion that Al Gore is a bloated waste of space.” http://forum.martinsvillemedia.com/showthread.php?p=29948

Ok, enough with the links. But I hope you see my point. There is a somewhat healthy anti-global warming movement out there that is being completely ignored by one side, and given credibility by the other. Well, you say, that’s normal, right? One side quotes some people, and the other sides finds its own sources.

No, that shouldn’t be normal, especially when the opposing sides are political parties. When did science turn political? I bet I can answer my own question! When money and popularity became involved. Watch your pocketbook!

If you can’t tell, I don’t believe that we are significantly contributing to global warming, and I have my doubts about whether it is happening at all. Yes, in the last few decades we’ve seen increase in temps. So what! The word’s been around for at least 6,000 years according to me, and maybe a billion or two according to evolutionists!

But my point here isn’t to promote or demote the theory of Global Warming, even if I hope I gave you some food for thought. I wanted to show you how we all believe what we’re told, and the real scientists are either ignored or don’t care to say anything in the first place. If global warming weren’t such a good fundraiser, you never would have heard a word about it in your life! So take a step back, stop being led, and try to find out the real truth. (And I unashamedly ask you to believe me!)