Over the past months, I have been listening to the news with incredulity. There is a continuous stream of propaganda that flows unrestricted from the news studios of ABC, NBC, CBS and yes, even FOX.

The stream of "news" isn't limited to the major television networks either. The newspapers seem to be on the same honey wagon spreading fertilizer nearly as thick as the TV. The problem isn't so much that it is being broadcast, it's that all of you believe every syllable uttered, printed, or broadcast. Let me try to illustrate.

Name ONE noted scientist claiming Global Warming is a threat. I'm waiting...No AL Gore isn't a scientist. Try again....No, I am pretty sure Sean Penn isn't one either. One more time.....Please, Rosie Odonnel? Are you on crack?

When arguments against the so called Global Warming threat are presented, they rarely if ever receive national news attention. Trust me there is plenty to be said against the theory.

Don't misunderstand me, I am not suggesting we shouldn't be making an effort to improve and protect our environment ( I drive a diesel because soot does not promote a deteriorating ozone layer, but settles to the surface where it is absorbed as a carbon byproduct enriching the soil, and it is very economical!), but the current trend of efforts would have us abandoning our Prius's and solar powered cars in a few decades so we can vacate the planet to protect the remnants of the polar ice cap (by then, it will be forming over Nebraska!). The point I am trying to make is that what we are more likely witnessing a cyclic and natural phenomena and not mother nature telling us to get our affairs in order...or else. Sort of like Al Gore saying buy a Prius...or else. "Pay me to offset your carbon footprint...or else". Or else what AL? Carbon is THE most abundant element on the planet and we are now to believe that its presence here, whether natural or through divine creation, is harmful and the key to the demise of our civilization? I believe Al Gore is a con man and alarmist with absolutely no real scientific evidence to support his hypothesis. What he does have is a collection of data supporting his agenda (and his carbon offset enterprize). Please don't take my rant as evidence. Libraries are full of real evidence. I won't suggest you look it up on the internet. Information on the web is too easy to fabricate (fake).

A number of serious scientists (2656 at last count) disagree that we should be acting (or reacting) they way we are. How many remember a book published in 1976 titled "How to survive in the coming ice age." At that time, many in the scientific world were convinced the planet was on its way to "Global Cooling" of biblical proportions. It was suggested that a new ice age would blanket the planet for centuries. Everyone needed to consider ways to reduce the cooling effects of our production processes and our life styles. These were seen as paramount to limiting effects on the atmosphere and the impact of the unstoppable ice formations. Did we overreact? Did we not only stop the coming ice age, but also reverse it....in 30 years? Are we so arrogant to think we could have such a dramatic impact on the planet in such a short span of time? What if we had reacted to those claims then as we are reacting to the latest claims of global catastrophe now? We would probably find abandoned industrial sections all over the planet built to pump ozone reducing elements into the atmosphere. All in an effort to remove the blanket of (natural) ozone that was limiting the penetration of solar heat from warming the planet. Man, we dodged a bullet with that one. Unfortunately, back then it was probably less because we got smart and recognized the fallacy with the logic, then that the economy sucked so bad, we couldn't afford to save the planet. Interesting web site: http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/monthly/monthly_1979-07.htmlIt shows a cyclical behavior in the "Hole in the Ozone". Hmmmm imagine that.

Keep in mind that we haven't even been measuring or collecting data long enough to determine what a warming or cooling "cycle" might consist of. The organization most responsible for collecting, cataloging and distributing environmental data in this country (NOAA) is only 201 years old. Just how accurate were the supercomputers in 1807? How about 1908, just 100 years ago? What is the baseline for such data collection? Has anyone seen the satellite picture of the hole in the ozone layer from say 1900? How about 1950? How about 1960? Some of you may not actually see the humor in my question. There were no satellites taking pictures! The earliest satellite taking pictures of the planet arrived in the early 1960's. Even then, the real science of satellite imagery wasn't perfected until the 1970's.

I implore you to educate yourselves. Even a small effort to become aware of your surroundings will allow you to recognize just how stupid our government and many others think we are. They (Government) wants you to remain stupid and dependent on the information they provide. Until we as a public become more aware and educated, they will continue. Education isn't only found in colleges and universities, it is found in self study. It is found in libraries and museums. It can be found on the internet, but you need to know where to look and where NOT to look ( http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/pns/acronyms.html).

I am not a scientist or right-wing nut-job, but I am a thinker.

I want to extend a thank you to Yvonne Blouin who expressed a deeply emotional and obviously well considered opinion to this editorial. Her "Your stupid, thats for sure." (grammatical errors included) comments really serve to typify the people described in my comments. My speculation is that she may simply be too ignorant to recognize satire, parody, or humor. I suspect the entire article wasn't even read,which would imply her opinion was formed before reading.
But then, if everyone were perfect.....