Twitter icon  Facebook icon

 

I am an environmentalist. I recycle. I mulch and compost where I can. I grow vegetables. I plant trees. I also categorically reject the scare tactics and faulty science by the "High Priest" of global warming, Al Gore.

I started this section after my kid brought home a note from his gifted teacher informing us that his class would be watching the dubious documentary, An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore. I opted out for my son and at home we gave him both sides of the debate for him to look at and also offered the same materials to his teacher to share with the rest of the class.  The teacher declined to provide opposing material to the class. "The science is settled" she said.

Herein I attempt to provide some counter information in a reasonable manner for all to review but especially teachers who have bought into the global warming hysteria and think that Al Gore's so called documentary is worthy educational material. Educators, do you dare present rational opposing information or will you only present one side? Is that any way to teach? Show me you're better than that. Show your students both sides.

One of my core principles is... "Do the right things ... for the right reason." There are very good reasons for recycling, planting trees, carpooling, public transporation, etc. Al Gore screaming that the sky is falling is NOT a good reason. Being good moral stewards of our planet is a good reason. We all can agree on so much, let's not be scared into doing what needs to be done but rather do it becaues it makes sense.

 

Some interesting reading material  on "Global Warming" and related topics

global warming cartoon

I got this via email, source Washington Post.

Greenhouse Gas Comes from Solar Panels

 

Think switching to solar energy will make you green? Think again. Many of the newest solar panels are manufactured with a gas that is 17,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide in contributing to global warming.

 

Nitrogen trifluoride, or NF3, is used for cleaning microcircuits during the manufacture of a host of modern electronics, including flat-screen TVs, iPhones, computer chips—and thin-film solar panels, the latest (and cheapest) generation of solar photovoltaics. (Time named the panels one of the best inventions of 2008.) Because industry estimates suggested that only about 2 percent of NF3 ever made it into the atmosphere, the chemical has been marketed as a cleaner alternative to other higher-emitting options. For the past decade, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has actively encouraged its use. NF3 also wasn’t deemed dangerous enough to be covered by the Kyoto Protocol, making it an attractive substitute for companies and signatory countries eager to lower their emissions footprints.

It turns out that NF3 might not be so green after all. “NF3 has a potential greenhouse impact larger than … even that of the world’s largest coal-fired power plants,” according to a June 2008 study by researchers at the University of California, Irvine. Because NF3 isn’t covered by Kyoto, few attempts have been made to measure it in the atmosphere. But last October, scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography reported that four times more NF3 is present in the atmosphere than industry estimates suggest, and its concentration is rising 11 percent a year.

Compared with the damage caused by CO2 emissions, NF3 remains a blip because far less of it is emitted. But Ray Weiss, who led the Scripps team, thinks that, unless regulations require more complete greenhouse gas measurements, more unpleasant surprises will be in store. With NF3, he says, “We’re finding considerably more in the atmosphere than was expected. This [gas] won’t be the only example of that.”