Before you make a judgement on of climate change is man made, you must first examine the balance sheets (funding) of the science departments that proclaim this to be so.
Professors and their departments simple dont get the funding unless they support the view the climate change is man made. We are talking serious bucks here, a professor career is over if he does NOT sync with the political flavor of the University (normaly funded by the Government). Thats it in a nutshell, science is not objectively determined it is pre determined by the funding and resources of the budget allocated to it.
Climate change as been going on for 1000 of years, man has little or nothing to do with it. One volcanic eruption does more to change the climate that man does over a 1000 years.
Quote from Professor Brian J OBrien
…”An Australian professor of physics told him he “completely” supported his concern but had to keep his team of 65 researchers going with work, and “the only funding I can get for them and to get their PhDs is greenhouse funding from Canberra or where ever”….
O’Brien Bio: Australian physicist Professor Brian J O’Brien was closely involved in the Apollo moon missions. Brian O’Brien is a man who has seen and done extraordinary things. He didn’t just teach the NASA astronauts like Buzz Aldrin about upper atoms in space, and what they’d see when they actually reached the moon. He is also responsible for the critical studies into the sticky dust that lies on the moon. This moon dust, caused by the pounding of meteorites, got into just about every part of the Apollo spacecraft. Brian has also been to Antarctica to measure the Aurora Australis, and in his youth managed to survive three days lost and alone in a cave in complete darkness.
Makes a change doesn’t it? For most of the last century (20th) funding was only significantly flowing to those scientists that would state that it wasn’t caused by human activity. How offensive that it might start going the other way. And yet, that is still so for those scientists working for corporations who make most of their money by expecting everyone to share in the costs of their polluting industrial methods while they keep all the profits for themselves. That corporations should be held responsible for the pollution of their industrial practices and pay those costs as well as gaining the profits, should be obvious to any decent, thinking person . But it is still a rare occurrence. Why do old dirty technologies still get more financial and political support than clean modern technologies do? Because we still have far too many incumbent politicians that depend on the old mega corporations for their wealth, benefits and power.
Until recently, most politicians believed the bullshit and thought “greenies” to be dis-illusioned fools. The relatively few that are actually concerned about humanity rather than their own wealth and influence have recognised the overwhelming evidence that current global warming and related damaging climate changes in all parts of our planet are occurring at far too rapid a pace to be solely of natural cause. Yes, as you say, global warming and cooling are natural features of our world’s geophysical history, but naturally they occur over thousand year periods except for the occasional super volcano eruption. Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been determined to vary over a 75,000 year cycle, not the ballooning effect that has occurred over the last mere 100 years! While our technologically polluting idiocies are not the only cause, many of the natural causes have been triggered by them. Let’s face it. Is it really that hard to recognise that pouring our artificially generated waste products into the air, water and land of the environment we need to support ourselves is an insanely stupid thing to do if we wish our children and theirs to continue to live good lives? Climate changes are being recorded in every part of the world, occasionally beneficial, but mostly having severely detrimental impacts. As a global society we have to start rejecting the actions of the few, the rich who gain even more wealth by destroying our world, desiring a short term gluttony of profits that despite the oft claimed “trickle down” effect, never seems to benefit but a very small percentage of others. Why should it, any finances that trickle down are soon sucked up by the vacuum pump actions of some other rich person. The saddest thing is that moving to a clean, green technological society would actually boost the economy to the benefit of all, even the rich people that are hindering the economic, social and ethical development of what could be. Our world could be so much better a place for all, it is time we demanded our supposed leaders, whether political, religious, commercial or financial that they start forming policies to do so, rather than policies that solely benefit themselves!