The Great Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle, more responsible in using science Global warming is turning 38! The idea of global warming has been brought up and continuously discussed 38 years ago since the publication of a journal article Are we on the brink of a pronounced global warming?, yet after 38 years, debates of global warming has extended to the movie industry. An Inconvenient Truth and The Great Global Warming Swindle holds conflicting opinions towards the existence of global warming, however, since science must contains correct analysis of data as well as its logical relationship with long-term observation (Lucas, 2008), The Great Global Warming Swindle seems to be more responsible in using science. It may seems compelling when Albert Gore shows the relentlessly going up CO2 level, melted ice of Mount Kilimanjaro, Glacier National Park and Columbia Glacier because of the rising temperature and finally tells “when there’s more carbon dioxide, the temperature gets warmer.”

However, it is the most irresponsible remarks of An Inconvenient Truth and is unlikely to be amenable in science. It has been generally agreed that because the level of temperature and CO2 are divided by a time lag of several hundred years in ice-core data, variations in temperature precede rises in atmospheric CO2. (Douglass, D. H. Pearson, B. D. and Singer, S. F. 2004). That is to say, CO2 emissions does not lead to higher temperature, but is the production only. This authenticates the opinion of The Great Global Warming Swindle, and with incorrect theoretical basis, An Inconvenient Truth can be seen as misleading rather than using science responsibly.

We have to admit that The Great Global Warming Swindle can’t raise as much environmental consciousness as An Inconvenient Truth do, but we shouldn’t ignore its responsible using of science. On the one hand, The Great Global Warming Swindle contains more precise study. As is said that after the WW Ⅱ ,the temperature decreased when the emission of CO2 is significantly going up, it weakens their positive relations and offers a unique perspective. On the other hand, it explains more real phenomenon to the public. Longer time was covered in this movie and indicates that climate is always changing without any help from humans. “Holocene Maximum” is one significantly warmer period lasting for a few thousand years (Dean, W, E.; Bradebury, J, P.; Anderson, R, Y. and Barnosky, C, W. 1984).

In conclusion, judging the better movie in science using is highly controversial and very complex. As a result of less scientific fallacy, more precise study and more convincing truth, The Great Global Warming Swindle seems to be more responsible in using science. However, one thing is for sure, time will tell the truth of climate change. Not only should science be responsible, everyone must fulfill the sharing responsibility and protect our only planet.

Reference,
Broecker, W, S. (1975, 8 Aug). Are we on the brink of a pronounced global warming?. Science, Vol. 189 ,no. 4201 ,pp. 460-463
Dean, W, E.; Bradebury, J, P.; Anderson, R, Y. and Barnosky, C, W. (1984). The Variability of Holocene Climate Change: Evidence from Varved Lake Sediments. Science 226: 1191-194 Douglass, D. H. Pearson, B. D. and Singer, S. F. (2004). Altitude Dependence of Atmospheric Temperature Trends: Climate Models Versus Observations. Geophysical Research Letters 31 : L13208, DOI: 10 (1029/2004): GL020103

Lucas, S. (2008). The responsibility of science to society. Effective Communications. Retrieved from: www.ppu.org.uk/learn/infodocs/st_science_res.html‎