Home » Science & Nature » Ecology » The Great Global Warming Controversy

The Great Global Warming Controversy

© Diana Tesky

I had planned on focusing this week's and next week's articles on the topics of feeding wildlife and predator introduction, but I thought I would break up the wildlife management issues with more general ecology topics. One such topic is global warming. There are opinions and ideas on both sides of the issue, so rather than try to go into depth explaining the views of the sides, I'll let them explain themselves through their web sites.

Recently UN meetings were held to reach an agreement on global warming. No agreement could be reached, as attested to by the following news stories:

http://news.excite.com/news/r/001125/13/... http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/Dai... http://www.law.pace.edu/env/energy/globa...

Politics aside, is there anything to the global warming dispute? For me here in North Dakota, global warming doesn't sound like such a bad idea. It couldn't hurt for our average temperature to be a degree or two warmer, could it? If you consider that the temperature has risen by less than one or two degrees over the past 100 years, how much of an affect could that make?

According to the EPA serious consequences can arise due to this slight temperature change. http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/

The NOAA agrees that global warming is taking place. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ol/climate/glob...

According to others, this is a natural fluctuation, and 100 years isn't long enough to determine any kind of trend. http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba299.html

Many climatologists and atmospheric scientists state that the global warming models are faulty, and global warming itself is nothing to worry about. http://www.globalwarming.org/ http://www.skepticism.net/global_warming/

Considering the oversimplification that the global warming supporters use to explain their theory, the constant manipulating and changing of models that were declared to be 99% accurate, and the realistic look at trends and factors that contribute to climate change, I have to admit I'm not sold on the idea.

From a purely scientific outlook those who are rejecting global warming have the facts more solidly on their side. We should of course want cleaner air, less pollution and a healthier environment, but espousing global warming to force these issues and enact policy is not a wise choice in my opinion.

In light of the controversial nature of this topic, I'd like to leave open the opportunity for discussion. You can add your comments and remarks to the "Global Warming" discussion list. Feel free to discuss the Kyoto treaty, the UN Summit, the facts and figures on global warming or anything pertaining to the topic that you would like to add.