Right now i am recording the documentary ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’.

I am pretty curious to see it. I just caught a little bit of the debate that is attatched to it on tv. Some scientists where debating that the current climatechange is caused by human action. I think this is a strange debate. The only fact i think one can use in this debate is that CO2 levels have risen and the temperature is following that trend, as it always does. 

So all the arguments that this happens all the time, and that it is natural are true. But they don’t count; wé are the cause this time. And the only real issue is; do we as humans want to try to control ourselves, to prolong the time our civilisation has here? I don’t think there is much more to it.

My personal motivation is also that i think our earth is the most wonderful place i can imagine, and i would like me, my kids and theirs to be able to enjoy it. This is a personal and selfish motive and i think a lot of the people that try to combat climatechange share in it.

But isn’t the attitude of ignorance and pointless criticism also selfish? To think all is good to breakdown your world, deplete your resources an then leave it stripped bare for your or someone else’s children? There is no religion or other way of live that condones that, or makes it logical. We can interpret it that way, but that’s another story.

Why do people have the tendency to discuss things that are not debateable? Is the object of that game to not prove yourself right or have a point, but to prove the other wrong or undermine his point?

So was Al Gore all wrong? I don’t think so. He presented the facts. And the did not do a bad job. But i have seen that film over 20 times now i think, and i have spotted some things that indeed can be debated, and some information that was just left out. For example; Yes, if half of Antarctica or Greenland melted the sea level would rise 6 meters, bút that can’t happen within the next 150 years and maybe much longer. Al forgot to mention that.

And i understand that he did, when i tell it to the kids it is clear that it breaks down the message in the movie.
In the same way these globalwarming critics leave information out of their stories. For example; They are debating something that doesn’t matter, and thus wasting time that could be spent making people aware of the real problem. 

So what’s the real problem? In think the IPCC has it right. The changes in the climate can be disastrous for us. A world without frozen poles is not uninhabitable and al lot of time will pass before the earth turns into a complete desert. But the bugs, the diseases, the flooding, the drought, the storms, the changes for agriculture and all that, will cause many of us to die. Or do we want to debate that too?

We don’t need to discuss evidence, or causes, we need to discuss what needs to be done, and if our ways are right. The climate speaks for our earth and says: ‘If you want to enjoy my hospitality much longer, control yourself!’

Both al Gore and the critics are saying that the earth is boss, and we can’t do anything else then follow her lead.
So i think the real problem, or better said, question, is: Why don’t we?