My views on Climate Change

In this class, we talk a lot about "climate change" (that's only the name because "global warming" was no longer helping their cause) and the effects it will have on the Earth in such a small span of time. I have thought a lot about this since Al Gore, a vice president, not scientist, came out with "An Inconvenient Truth." I can think critically of things and the idea just didn't make sense. It's not that I don't believe that our temperatures are warmer, I do. I just don't believe the malarky they spew to us that every breath we take is destroying the Earth. That is how plants breathe. They take in CO2 and release O2. We couldn't live without them, they can't live without us. 6CO2 + 6 H2O ---> C6H12O6 + 6O2... Basic biology. Any high school graduate knows that. Now, scientists (who once fell for the hype) are coming out against the Cap & Trade (as everyone should because the government has no constitutional right to pass a bill like that) and other "climate protection bills" and telling the truth. In an article published 10/07/2009, Leighton Steward announced his plan to go to Washington to try to defeat any climate bill because it is not necessary. In fact, according to Steward, a bill could be harmful to the Earth. Finally, someone is putting aside their fear to speak out and actually telling the truth (http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers/2009/10/07/scientist-carbon-dioxide-doesnt-cause-global-warming.html).
Another idea that always puzzled me (since I was raised in a "Christian" household) is that these scientists who were supporting global warming, sorry, climate change, are the same scientists who believed that the Earth was going to become a giant fireball and we would all die, are the same people who have believed for decades that the Earth goes through cycles. We have extremely cold periods, and extremely hot periods. We came out of an ice age, for goodness sake. How did we come out of that ice age? Probably by warming the Earth more than 2*C... The idea that we once warmed and cooled, without humans polluting like they do, and some died, but that is the idea of survival of the fittest. Those who could adapt, did. The same stands true today, those who can adapt to the changing climate will survive, those who can't, won't. Its pretty simple biology.
Maybe the problem is that these Glob.... Sorry, Climate Change scientists never took biology, because they seem to be missing some of the basic facts. Even without any biology type class, I know these things, why don't they?! Erasing Carbon means erasing every living thing on this Earth. Humans, plants, animals, etc are all carbon-based organisms. How can we cut out carbon? According to politicians, we can cut carbon by giving more money to Al Gore and GE so that they can pick a tree and put your name on it. That is what Carbon offsets are, already planted trees that they just stick your name on if you purchase one of their credits. (http://www.tech-know.eu/uploads/THE_VINDICATION_OF_CARBON.pdf).
Another article, posted 09/16/2009, talks about the possibility of a GLOBAL COOLING trend. According to recent models, the temperatures will begin to steady, and following that we will see temperatures drop. This is especially asserted by Marco Tedesco and Andrew J. Monaghan (http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009GL039186.shtml). They have found that the antarctic snowmelt is at a 30-year low (I bet it would be longer but we can never know... we didn't have satellite and stuff more than 30-years ago).

(Citation for picture above http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2009/10/06/antarctic-ice-melt-at-lowest-levels-in-satellite-era/ OR http://www.climate-skeptic.com/)
What will Gore and his posse do if the temperatures drop steadily for a decade?! Do we then blame Carbon, saying that it causes the temperatures to decrease, or do we blame Oxygen or Nitrogen (which, in case people don't know, are also essential for life)... I wouldn't put it past him. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/today/tomfeilden/2009/09/an_inconvenient_truth_about_gl.html).
Throughout college, we are told to think critically of everything we hear, and upon thinking critically, I have determined that University Colloquium is a total waste of my time, and I will finish it, just to get the credits. I have determined that Florida Gulf Coast University is trying to indoctrinate its students (since they are impressionable and have no other sources of information) to believe that they MUST change the world. The only way to eliminate Carbon would be to kill everyone and everything. To stop wearing clothes, eating anything, and just plain wipe the Earth clean. Now, people say that what I'm thinking sounds crazy... But to me, the only solution to this so-called problem is crazy!
I am sick of college classes being one sided, especially classes that are required. If this class were a choice (most students wouldn't take it) it would be one thing. But the school has to do something to make up for building on land that wasn't "ecologically safe" to build on. So their solution is to indoctrinate their students, and make them pay $500 to be indoctrinated. I find that to be a little ridiculous.

After today's lecture, I decided to look up when exactly correlation can mean causation (since I asked and my question was pushed aside). Well, I found an answer from a professor at East Carolina University. He said when "...the data have been gathered by experimental means and confounds have been eliminated, correlation does imply causation." My issue with that is that the data weren't gathered by experimental means, they were taken solely on the basis that we think we know when the information is from. Another issue is that confounds have not been eliminated. We don't know precisely when this extracted data are from. It is scientifically impossible; also, how can we be 100% positive that nothing has effected the air being extracted from the ice. Thinking critically, correlation, in this case, does not prove causation. (http://core.ecu.edu/psyc/wuenschk/StatHelp/Correlation-Causation.htm)

Yet another arguement for Climate Change is that there is a consensus among scientists. Well, thinking back in time. There have been PLENTY of times when the consensus was wrong. Almost all scientists once thought the Earth was flat... WRONG. Scientists once thought the sun revolved around the Earth... WRONG. Scientists once thought that illness was caused by possession by demons... WRONG. After that was the humoral theory... WRONG. Body-Mind Dualism, anatomical theory, cellular theory, germ theory... ALL WRONG. What about Pluto?! Continental drift... Wrong. I could probably go on for a VERY long time. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superseded_scientific_theories, among thoughts in my brain and my text book "Health Psychology" by: Richard O. Straub (2007)). In a 2004 study by Dennis Bray, it was found that there truly was no consensus. Of 372 Climate scientists, the results showed that a majority doesn't agree with the statement that "climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes." The results are as follows:

Frequencies:

1- strongly agree- 50 (9.4% of valid responses)

2- 134 (25.3% of valid responses)

3- 112 (21.1% of valid responses)

4- 75 (14.2% of valid responses)

5- 45 (8.5% of valid responses)

6- 60 (10.8% valid responses)

7- strongly disagree- 54 (9.7% of valid responses)

The mean score was 3.62, with a standard deviation of 1.84. That means that they don't totally agree with what is being taught by the so-called consensus http://www.sepp.org/Archive/NewSEPP/Bray.htm).

Journal Blog Part II: Entries 6-15

Blog 6: Calculate your Ecological Footprint
My score is 3.2 Earths. I don’t agree with the results. I had a low score of 0.7 Earths until one of the last sections, about shopping. I shop maybe twice a year, and that is always if something is necessary (other than grocery shopping and junk of that sort). I guess I must have lost points because I don’t shop for “organic” clothes. But the problem I have with that argument is that clothes that may have an “organic” label, may not truly be “organic,” and clothes that may not have a specialty label may be “organic.” It also depends on your definition of organic. I believe organic materials are naturally made materials, and anything like cotton is organic, but not labeled as such. I don’t believe I need to change my lifestyle. I don’t agree with the results.
I have read about some of the people who are fighting for changing lifestyles, and they are mostly hypocrites. For example, Barbara Streisand has been quoted as saying “We must make concrete changes in our lifestyles to help solve this energy crisis and now is the time to do it…” She said that after she required the following for a tour; 13 53-foot semi tractor-trailer’s, 4 rental vans, 14 crew buses, and 1 limo for herself. Speaking of solar farms, Jim Harvey (cofounder of Alliance for Responsible Energy Policy) said, “Our position is that none of this is needed.”
If these people, among others, truly cared, they would change their overly excessive lifestyles, instead of being hypocritical. I feel that I don’t need to change my lifestyle because I have no reason to, I do not believe in “climate change” as a true issue.

Blog 7: List your daily water usage
I use approximately 11.5 gallons of water per day. I don’t go way out of my way to conserve water, but I consider what I do sustainable. I don’t use excess water. I shut the water off while brushing my teeth, take only 5-10 minute showers, depending on what needs to be done on a particular day. I don’t do dishes if there is only one dish. We have a toilet that has low water flushes. We water our plants with water from the sink, we don’t get extra water just for the plants.

Blog 8: Water Rights Reflection
Our capitalistic society allows people to sell something for profit, as long as it does not belong to anyone else (which includes communities). Like it or not, we are capitalists, and that is the idea behind capitalism. If you can find something that works and people will pay for it, it is your right to go ahead and do what you do. A project like this could impact the local residents in Texas because it will most likely be in a place the touches other peoples lives. If it could be in the middle of nowhere, it wouldn’t impact the Texans that live in the area. It would positively affect the people in cities that can’t get as much water due to their urban development. The local wildlife may or may not be affected by a project like this. I do not know the situation of the wildlife in the area. If something like this were to happen in Florida, it probably wouldn’t be possible. Under the state of Florida, there is mostly swamp and it would be very difficult to route an underground water pipe through many areas.

Blog 9: Field Trip #2 Estero Bay Historic Cottage and Matanzas Pass
The field trip to Estero Bay Historic Cottage and Matanzas Pass Preserve was kind of fun. I enjoyed learning about Fort Myers Beach and the history of the island. I hated the mosquitoes. I enjoy taking walks through nature, but I did not enjoy the high heat or stop and go for a whole lot of nothing. Many of the times we stopped, it was to point out the same things that were already pointed out, which got old fast. The history lecture was my favorite part. I enjoy learning history, especially from people who actually lived it. The boardwalk was nice. It is great that the area was able to be preserved because people could be missing out on the beauty of Estero Bay.

The picture on the above left is of Estero Bay. What a beautiful picture. The one above right is of the sign at the entrance of the preserve.




This picture is of a sign that says that the area was restored to its original condition, which I find amazing that it is even possible. But it is great that they were able to take out all of the exotic plants and leave only native ones.


(All above photos taken by Kimberly Legendre ©2009)

Blog 10: Conservation 20/20
Conservation 20/20 is a group dedicated to preserving and protecting land in Lee County. It is a group of concerned citizens who didn’t want to see extreme development take over the land and natural resources of the county. The first time I heard about this program was on our field trip to Matanzas Pass Preserve, but I didn’t know what it was until I read their background on their website. I have never been to any of the preserves, except Matanzas Pass Preserve. I am not from Lee County, so I rarely visit such places around here. Since I enjoy visiting nature trails and such, it is possible that I will visit one of the preserved areas. I do not know of any existing programs similar to Conservation 20/20. I am on the side of the argument where I disagree with spending taxpayers dollars to preserve areas. It is not the job of the hard working citizens to pay for special interests, which is exactly what this project is.

Blog 11: Food Intake
I did not eat breakfast before heading out to class. While in class, I had a 16.9 oz bottle of water. I reused the bottle from a previous day and poured in water from the Brita filter. For dinner, I had “tuna noodle salad,” which is elbow noodles, mayonnaise, and tuna, served cold. I made this when I got home for class and ate it several hours later. I am not sure where my elbow noodles came from as I purchased a 10lb bag and dumped it all in a plastic container. I threw the bag away several months ago. The tuna is Bumble Bee brand Solid White Albacore. I learned from the Bumble Bee website (http://bumblebee.com/Sustainability/) that Bumble Bee helped found the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF). That means that they are always searching for more sustainable ways to catch Tuna and reduce waste. The mayonnaise in my dinner is Hellman’s brand. After unsuccessfully trying to research it online, I attempted to call the 800 listed on the jar. I tried for an hour, receiving a busy signal, before giving up.

Blog 12: Field Trip #1 Campus Trails
I did not attend the Campus Trail field trip. I am frustrated that this course is required and that we must go on all kinds of field trips that I do not want to go on. Most of the field trips I can just grin and bear it, just to get through, but the Slough Slogging was something that I was not going to do. I paid $440 for this class, and was not about to ruin a brand new pair of sneakers or a good pair of pants. I am not really an outdoors person, and really do not do well in areas with water. I am glad that this university is taking steps (however hypocritical they are) to preserve the natural areas on campus, but that doesn’t mean I want to go sloshing through dirty water, with God knows what in it. Up to this point, my views of Colloquium have not changed.

Blog 13: Energy Usage
(Recording for Monday October 5, 2009)
I do not have access to the meters at my apartment. The power company is Florida Power and Light. According to their website (http://www.fplgroup.com/about/contents/fpl.shtml), the electricity is generated through a “diverse mix of fuels at its power plants…” It claims to be a clean-energy company, which means it has low emissions, under the national average. Fifty-three percent of the electricity comes from clean-burning natural gas and 22 percent from nuclear power.
Today, I was stuck inside waiting for Comcast to come fix my internet connection, so I did not travel anywhere. I cannot estimate how many miles I drive in a year because the car was used when I bought it 3 months ago, so it would not be an accurate reading of how much I drive. I believe, however, that in the car I owned before this one I drove approximately 7,000 miles per year. I also know that I got 19 MPG in that car. The total carbon output for this car is 8.00 tons (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/noframes/19516.shtml {which is where I got the photo}). I feel that I make sustainable choices. I conserve energy and fuel when possible. I carpool when schedules coincide, I make only weekly trips to the store, no more, I shut off lights and other things when they are not in use, and I try my hardest to keep energy costs low.

Blog 14: Packaging
Cell phone- the cell phone (when it was new) came in a cardboard box.
Brush- There was no packaging; it was on the shelf as is.
Toothbrush- in packaging (part cardboard, part plastic)
Computer- packaging was a recycled cardboard box, that I then recycled.
Remote- came with the TV. It is a used TV so when I bought it, it was as is.
Book-bag- Came as is, with paper stuffing inside
Textbooks- I purchase used textbooks on Amazon.com. Most of my books were shipped to my home in a cardboard box with a packing slip (just a piece of computer paper) inside. The ones that weren’t shipped in a cardboard box were sent in a bubble envelope.
Pen- Packaged in plastic with a cardboard insert
Binder- no packaging when I purchased it.
iPod- packaged in a plastic case, that I still use as a holder for my ear buds.
I feel that I make sustainable choices when shopping because I try my hardest to avoid the plastic stuff that’s not good for the environment.

Blog 15: Field Trip #4 Corkscrew Swamp
Corkscrew Swamp was a fun field trip. Unfortunately, I was ill throughout the walks, so I was unable to enjoy the full experience. What I was able to enjoy was breathtaking. The flowers on the left, Black Eyed Susan’s, are beautiful, and the field of yellow was amazing.

I honestly don’t remember exactly what this picture was of, but it was a pretty cool looking plant.





To the right is a picture of the grasshopper that we saw on the
boardwalk. There were very few examples of wildlife and this was neat to see something.





(Photos taken by Kimberly Legendre ©2009)