Global Warming And Arrogance

The world has been around for billions of years. At least that's what I've read. I can't testify to it personally. I haven't been around for quite that long.

I've also read that there have been changes over time. Darwin and others have expounded on evolution and how plant and animal life have varied, and life on earth has been severely impacted by extraterrestrial phenomena, sometimes with severe effects on the mortality of our terrestrial life forms. A good example is the extinction of dinosaurs (and who knows what else) following our being hit by a meteor. Things can happen, and they do.

We are now entering a period characterized by increasing temperatures – Global Warming – that has provoked great debates. Many believe that human actions are responsible for what is happening, and they're focusing their attention on what steps we must take to repair the world. Without any intent to question their concern, I think their view is a little narrow, and there are several questions that need answers:

1. How do we define such “warming?”
2. Should we be concerned about it?
3. What causes it?
4. Does human action contribute to it?
5. Can we stop it or at least limit it?
6. At what cost?
7. What are the likely effects of our actions?

It's a lot to consider, but I thought I'd start with a quote from the Wikipedia article on the subject:

The idea that Global Warming is a natural cycle is well understood from paleo data covering the past 1 million years. Is there a difference between current climate, and the natural cycle? For the past million years the natural climate has oscillated between warm periods and ice ages. This shifting in and out of warm periods and ice ages is correlated strongly with Milankovitch cycles.

I don't pretend to understand the subject all that well – especially Milankovitch cycles – but it's clear that warming happens. It's an anticipated feature related to the earth's position relative to the sun and happens without human actions. According to NASA, the earth has warmed 0.9^o Celsius since 1880 – almost 140 years. It seems like a small number, and it's below the peaks in some other periods of warming, but it's significant, and how much higher the peak it will go if it continues to rise is uncertain. There is certainly justification for concern.

And we're concerned. But many think that we're responsible for global warning. It's just like us humans to be so arrogant, so chutzpadik. We weren't around billions of years ago, but everything went on without us. Including global warming. We're not to blame for it.

But we're not off the hook altogether. We ought not wallow in hubris, but we do have some effect on the heavens and on earth. There's much argument about the existence of global warming and its cause(s). Some think that over the long haul we're in a period of cooling. Not likely, but it doesn't change anything. We don't cause cooling either.

There's much evidence, however, that we can affect the degree and the rate of warming. Without debating all the scientific equations and computer models – especially since I don't understand them – it's hard to ignore the predominant opinion of the scientific community that some of what we're producing is driving up the temperature. Whether what we do results in increased levels of carbon dioxide, an enlarging hole in the ozone layer, or something else, they're convinced that we can cause harm. How much? I don't know. I certainly wouldn't postulate on behalf of those who fear cooling that we accelerate programs that cause warming in order to fend off another ice age. Thinking that we can do so is more arrogance.

Recognizing the disagreement, it appears that our approach should be prudent. Proposals to change the nature of those products that appear to be contributing to warming are reasonable. But the changes should themselves be reasonable. Disruption of our lives and industries in the hope of an improvement in the situation is not the answer. (It is not arrogance to suggest that we're able to make many aspects of our situation worse. We've proved we can do that.) Improved utilization of natural forces (eg wind power) is expensive, but perhaps that is only in the short range. Substitution of products less likely to disrupt our earth and its environment makes sense as well.

What makes less sense is the mandate for rapid changes that will greatly unsettle our lives and industries. Inducements for improvements are warranted, but rapid, unthought-out, actions often lead to harmful results. It is presumptuous to believe that we can change the course of global warming quickly – or even at all. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

With humility.






May 22, 2017