Biology climate change truths and faults by peter Clyde.

Intro
In recent events, a topic of controversy has been the scientific analysis
of the earths climate. For over thirty years, scientists, activists, politicians,
and people of every way and life and creed have talked, argued, discussed,
debated, legislated, and investigated climate change. The climate is
important, and as stewards of this planet we have a responsibility to take
care of our planets climate, so far we are the only visible evidence of life in
the universe according to science. But also what is the point of living if you
cannot enjoy where you are? if we cannot use this gift of the earth? The
earth has ample resources if we are carful to use our planet to reach our full
potential responsibly by looking beyond conventional means, but using all
resource (i.e. wind, solar, fossil fuels, Tesla technology, energy from space,
etc.). I hope to express that this debate need not happen anymore and also
to show that we need to take a look at the evidence of climate change and
make an unbiased decision.
Opposing view, climate change exists.
In the 1970s scientists noticed some strange weather patterns.
According to various reports over the years, the climate has been changing
in a bad way since the industrial revolution. Causing temperatures to rise
and melt the polar Ice caps. Causing a chain reaction that is destroying the

planet. Many scientists agree that this is happening and needs to be

addressed before the climate becomes too unstable.
Aligning view climate change has been exaggerated and is not serious if
even existent
Unfortunately the discussion of our climate has been muddied by
various people and groups, vying for advantage over each other. Even to the
point of where science may have been skewed. Even to the point that much
of the data was made up all together. According to http://www.pnas.org not
all scientists are in agreement, only 2% of scientists of the two groups
sampled agree on the results of climate change. Also if you look at the orbit
of the earth, it goes through cycles of heating and cooling on a very long
term basis, this is not even considered often along with more factors of
shifting geology, freak events like super volcanos and other anomalies like
events from obects like the sun. Also recently people that were once behind
climate change have turned against it including the founder of the weather
channel, John Coleman according to http://insider.foxnews.com. Also the
science has been skewed by the various political maneuverings and biases of
people as demonstrated in an exchange published on the blaze.com: Got
this message yesterday from a very concerned climate change alarmist: Hi
Matt, I read you sometimes but I generally find you to be an assh*le. Just
being honest. I also think you have a reputation (or youd like to think you
have a reputation) as someone who isnt afraid to tell it like it is, but I think

you havent earned that. Actually you are very afraid to challenge any
republican talking point so you stick to the script on everything. I guess its
more important to be invited to the parties than to tell the truth. As seen it
is a very charged topic and needs to be tapered and cooled off to get to the
bottom of it.
My opinion.
We need further study into the climate before any sort of decision political or
scientific is made.

Works cited
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf

http://www.theblaze.com/?s=climate+change

http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/10/27/weather-channel-co-founder-john-coleman-climate-change-myth