Imagine this scenario. Within 50 years the latest ice age will start to set in, and all the efforts put into stopping global warming will have been in complete opposition to what would have been good for humanity.

What we know is that global temperatures have risen on average over the past few decades. As some skeptics point out, this warming may be due to events that are not man-made, and not the direct result of carbon emissions. What if this is true? Does this mean we should go back to producing more carbon fuel consuming vehicles and machinery? Does it mean that we can indiscriminately cut down forests and ignore the damage being caused to sea life?

The argument for controlling global temperatures is possibly flawed, and is easily described as a scare-tactic for those whose interests are not in line with the proponents of global warming. But why would anyone want to scare people into thinking that global warming is real and man-made? Is it more likely that World governments are conspiring to enslave all humanity under a new world order? Or is it more likely that scientists and governments are using this tactic to gain support for a green revolution which can potentially bring about a technological renaissance while at the same time cleaning the planet of the man-made filth that no one can deny?

Regardless of what the motives behind this green movement, the result is going to be cleaner air and better technology. I’d like to see someone argue against that.