The Colvin Report: Hot-Button Issues Start Here—Global Warming

First off, I’d like to introduce myself as a political contributor to GS, and welcome you to The Colvin Report.

You’ll quickly see that I am a bit of a skeptic. That’s probably a fair assessment, and looking at both sides and using logic to get beyond the curb appeal, I’ll attack some of the big issues in this election. I challenge you to join me in second guessing the ideas that the world presents.

Lots of people don’t know much about global warming, just the catch phrase which makes sense because that’s all the media portrays. But all this hype behind global warming is political, not scientific, and there are facts that challenge the “consensus” view. If you follow Al Gore much, you might be aware that the world is about to come to an end because of a recent increase in man-made carbon dioxide emissions. If you look further, you would find out that this increase is also responsible for forest fires, the war in Somalia, the war in Sudan, an increase in giant squid attacks, and may lead to the extinction of baseball.

The climate has changed drastically throughout history. Chances are it will continue, and the more likely culprit is the sun and slight galactic changes, not man-made emissions. The theory behind man-made emissions is that an increase of carbon dioxide is causing the Earth’s thermal blanket to get thicker, speeding up the greenhouse gas effect and causing heat to be trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere. Seems relatively simple right? Well, here's the kicker; some scientists believe that water vapor is responsible for 95% of the greenhouse gas effect and carbon is responsible for less then 1%, but activists completely discount water vapor in their calculations. With 99.99% of water vapor is occurring naturally, it seems like its worth consideration.

Global warming activists don’t explain why temperatures were higher in the 1930’s than they are today or why temperature actually declined between 1930 and 1970 despite an industrial boom and massive increase in carbon production. They don’t explain a clear cycle of temperature change irrespective of carbon levels that has occurred for millions of years.

And how about this response from Dr. Keith Shine (a lead scientists on the original United Nations’ IPCC panel (the leading authority for Al Gore and his bandwagon): "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report.” Or how about an editorial article by Dr. Frederick Seitz, the leading author of the science chapter, where he proclaims that 15 statements saying directly that evidence showed no link between carbon dioxide and climate change were removed from the report.

Strange statements for a consensus, and you don’t have to believe me; you can read it for yourself: US Senate Report; Global Warming Skeptics Site; Hot & Cold Media Spin Cycle: Challenges to Journalist Who Cover Global Warming; JunkScience.com; A Major Deception on Global Warming; A Treaty Built on Hot Air, Not Scientific Consenus; and Fred S. Singer & Dennis Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming, (2006).