The highly praised German publication Der Spiegel has published an article called “Not the End of the World as We Know It” which raises a number of important issues regarding the Global Warming scam and the Climate Change scare-mongering. It is not uncommon for Europe to be more level headed than our media here in the U.S. So let’s see what Der Spiegel had to say about it all. The article starts off with a bit of history involving Svante Arrhenius, the father of the “greenhouse effect” and moves on to describe the Little Ice Age that began in the 1300s which caused cooling temperatures that;

were too low for grain crops to mature. Famines and epidemics raged, and average life expectancy dropped by 10 years. In Germany, thousands of villages were abandoned and entire stretches of land depopulated.

Now wouldn’t that be a wonderful results of global cooling that the companies who benefit and profit from genetically modifying our food supply would welcome. The effects and shock were deep-seated and long-lasting but that’s not where it ends:

When temperatures plunged unexpectedly once again in the 1960s, many meteorologists were quick to warn people about the coming of a new ice age — supposedly triggered by man-made air pollution. Hardly anyone at the time believed a warming trend could pose a threat.

It was not until the rise of the environmental movement in the 1980s that everything suddenly changed. From then on it was almost a foregone conclusion that global warming could only be perceived as a disaster for the earth’s climate. Environmentalists, adopting a strategy typical of the Catholic Church, have been warning us about the horrors of greenhouse gas hell ever since — painting it as a punishment for the sin of meddling with creation.

On the subject of reversing the natural change of the climate the article had this to say:

we can no longer completely prevent climate change. No matter how much governments try to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, it will only be possible to limit the rise in global temperatures to about 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century. But even this moderate warming would likely have far fewer apocalyptic consequences than many a prophet of doom would have us believe.

For one thing, the more paleontologists and geologists study the history of the earth’s climate, the more clearly do they recognize just how much temperatures have fluctuated in both directions in the past. Even major fluctuations appear to be completely natural phenomena. Additionally, some environmentalists doubt that the large-scale extinction of animals and plants some have predicted will in fact come about. “A warmer climate helps promote species diversity,” says Munich zoologist Josef Reichholf.

Now that’s not what we are hearing in our country at all. Or not often anyway. A warmer climate that increases the diversity of species and could possibly have positive benefits? That is not entirely implausible if you consider:

Improved regionalized models also show that climate change can bring not only drawbacks, but also significant benefits, especially in northern regions of the world where it has been too cold and uncomfortable for human activity to flourish in the past. However it is still a taboo to express this idea in public. For example, countries like Canada and Russia can look forward to better harvests and a blossoming tourism industry, and the only distress the Scandinavians will face is the guilty conscience that could come with benefiting from global warming.

And there’s another side to the doomsday coin that gullible fools have been throwing at us. While the scare-mongers and fear-predators are telling us how many people will die because of the effects of Global Warming, they are not taking into account the number of lives that will be saved because of it:

The medical benefits of higher average temperatures have also been ignored. According to Richard Tol, an environmental economist, “warming temperatures will mean that in 2050 there will be about 40,000 fewer deaths in Germany attributable to cold-related illnesses like the flu.”

The article also debunks a number of myths about Global Warming, most of which are already covered on this site and the many archive articles. But there is another one that is worth making note of:

According to another persistent greenhouse legend, massive flooding will strike major coastal cities, raising horrific scenarios of New York, London and Shanghai sinking into the tide. However this horror story is a relic of the late 1980s, when climate simulations were far less precise than they are today. At the time, some experts believed that the Antarctic ice shield could melt, which would in fact lead to a dramatic 60-meter (197-foot) rise in sea levels. The nuclear industry quickly seized upon and publicized the scenario, which it recognized as an argument in favor of its emissions-free power plants.

But it quickly became apparent that the horrific tale of a melting South Pole was nothing but fiction. The average temperature in the Antarctic is -30 degrees Celsius. Humanity cannot possibly burn enough oil and coal to melt this giant block of ice. On the contrary, current climate models suggest that the Antarctic will even increase in mass: Global warming will cause more water to evaporate, and part of that moisture will fall as snow over Antarctica, causing the ice shield to grow. As a result, the total rise in sea levels would in fact be reduced by about 5 cm (2 inches).

It’s a different story in the warmer regions surrounding the North Pole. According to an American study published last week, the Arctic could be melting even faster than previously assumed. But because the Arctic sea ice already floats in the water, its melting will have virtually no effect on sea levels.

Yet Al Gore and his Global Warming “religion” will have us believe that we are just moments away from drowning. Maybe if he scares us enough we will buy carbon credits that will help further his own profits? Are we going to drown because of the false science and skewed data that Mr. Gore is showing us or might it be because:

The climate is increasingly being turned into a scapegoat, to deflect attention from other environmental crimes. A typical example is the misleading debate over catastrophic flooding, which is in fact caused by too much development along rivers and not by more extreme weather events, which we can’t change anyway.

The article further concludes:

It’s nothing but fear-mongering, for which there is no concrete evidence. On the contrary, there is much to be said for the argument that warming temperatures promote biodiversity. There is a clear relationship between biodiversity and temperature. The number of species increases exponentially from the regions near the poles across the moderate latitudes and to the equator. To put it succinctly, the warmer a region is, the more diverse are its species.

If Al Gore and his army of “Warmees” would really care about the environment instead of their own profits and illusions of creating a world wide carbon credit trading “stock market” they would be talking about the things that really mess up our environment and the pollution that is pumped into the air and put into the ground, or perhaps the insanely dangerous companies that are toying with genetics that they do not understand. Maybe they can think about how to improve the quality of human life by turning their attention to the predators on top of the food chain.