On Earth warmer — can be seen with the naked eye. Not every winter spoils frost and snow thaws Arctic, retreating snowfields of Greenland … It would seem that it is no secret that the greenhouse effect — the result of human activity. However, in recent times louder voices of skeptics trying to deny the obvious facts. Who benefits?
Why deny the obvious?
Unprecedented amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rise, which leads to global warming. The average air temperature at Earth's surface has increased by 0,8 ° C in the last hundred years. Now the climate is changing even faster at 0,2 ° C per decade.
If this goes on, the end of the world will soon turn from the category to the category of myth inevitable reality. Climate warming on average 4-6 ° C will lead the planet to global catastrophe. Not hard to calculate how much is left to wait …
We always had such a forecast opponents in the scientific community, but always under the influence of overwhelming evidence they drastically changed their opinion. There is a discrepancy in the figures, dates, but in general, scientists around the world have come to a consensus, if not to take action now, the threat to the very existence of mankind will increase.
The question is, why deny the obvious? The answer is simple: the suspension of the harmful effects on the atmosphere is fraught with industrial capital loss of excess profits.
And the sponsorship of research in the field of climate research is too expensive. In the world's scientific community believe that the most reliable way to implement the financing of development in this area — is the creation of a new separate science, supports the theory of global warming. However allocated for research funds disappear somewhere, the findings of climate scientists ridiculed far from science journalists, and in government circles they are increasingly being called alarmists.
Officially, Western scientists have not yet said that subject to pressure, but they are constantly experiencing it for yourself. Where is the pressure coming from? From the top.
Back in 2002, Phil Cooney, the White House appointed to head the Board of Control of the environment, has made about 400 (!) Changes in the report on climate change. This completely eviscerate the meaning of the document. As a result of the scandal erupted Cooney was forced to resign, but was left stranded: the very next day he was offered a well-paid position in the oil company "Exxon Mobil".
The Bush administration tried to censor even that would control all the performances of climate scientists in the media, especially after the disastrous hurricane "Katrina". Leading climate scientists James Hansen said that NASA leadership openly interfered in his contacts with the press. He confirmed that he had threatened to "unfortunate consequences" if he did not stop for interviews.
In 2007, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform U.S. House of Representatives concluded: "The Bush administration has systematically tried to manipulate the science of climate change, by misleading the public." A similar case occurred even earlier, in 2004 in the UK. Only after a series of similar revelations western politicians had to admit climate change — one of the most serious problems of our time. More serious than the threat of terrorism.
More "serious" problems
But not only the White House and government from a number of countries are trying to conceal the truth. Imporant big business. Naturally, the one who pollutes the atmosphere. Over $ 15 million spent the same "Exxon Mobil" to publish a series of "scientific" articles that no climate threat does not exist. But it was enough to demand a British scientist to stop funding the false orgy, as right-wing politicians began to speak of violation of freedom of speech. The very same "Exxon Mobil" cynically declared that only trying to draw attention to the "more serious" issues.
Environmentally dangerous business trying to enlist the support of politicians (you might guess, on what basis). Known for her skeptic Climate British journalist Melanie Phillips says, for example, that the UK Treasury is using global warming to levy new taxes, and the very warming invented (!) At the residence of the Prime Minister. As they say, no comment.
As once the big tobacco companies have tried to show no association between smoking and lung cancer, and now energy companies are trying to undermine the relationship between human activities release into the atmosphere of carbon dioxide and global warming. Here's how it's done.
Politics and business: the plot doomed
In 1991, the National Association of the mining industry in the USA, the Western Association for the supply of fuel and the Edison Electrical Institute, a $ 500 thousand dollars for the creation of "a new information board to protect the environment." It would seem a good thing. But the real problem was a pseudo-scientific organizations to brainwash the public, arguing that there is no warming. Enough to bring the much-touted slogan of the board: "Some say that the temperature of the Earth rises. Some have said that the earth is flat … "
Newly-born council quickly disbanded on charges of scientific fraud. But the business of time (and money) does not waste the gift. In 1998, the American Petroleum Institute attempted to retry their predecessors. A group of interested parties, including the scientist-skeptic Fred Singer, famous politicians and leadership — what do you think? — Well, all the same, "Exxon Mobil" met to draw up a secret plan. "We will achieve victory — said in the final document — when every average citizen is aware of any ambiguities or climate threat and believe that it is contrary to common sense." Clearer to say.
Before this dubious group disbanded in 2002, it consisted of such giants as "General Motors", "Ford" and other well-known companies who have fought and are still fighting against the Kyoto Protocol.
The price of silence
One of the most prominent skeptics — Myron Ebell was lit for the first time in the scandal connected with the name of Phil Cooney. But the climax of notoriety he achieved his statement in BBC Today program in 2004 that European scientists, in contrast to the U.S., can not work independently, as their state sponsors. Like, it's simple: the state needs money, it blows the "myth" of global warming, and scientists, not to be left without funding to support this fiction.
"Is not it grand deception that human activity contributes to global warming?" — Echoes Ebell Yeshe one opponent of protection of the environment, U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe.
Fulfills a substantial fee and Melanie Phillips, who in his conclusions went even further: "The myth of climate change — is nothing but a hidden ideological strategy directed against America, big business and capitalism in general."
Perhaps the aforementioned ladies and gentlemen, large industrial companies, poisonous atmosphere of the planet, and would do well in their fabrications, but they deny the chatter and melting ice, and the number of natural disasters, which killed tens of thousands of people and billions of dollars in damages applied economics, and daily forecasts weather.
Yet skillful silence and denial of the obvious facts significantly impede effective action against big industrial capital at stake the very existence of the world's population.
The more ignored the consequences of greenhouse effect, the more carefully concealed growth disastrous climate change, the more expensive it will have to pay in the near future for humanity inevitably impending global catastrophe.
Source: "Secrets of the twentieth century. Gold Series" № 51
Category: Scientists, experts, science