The Problem
Is the earth getting warmer?
Absolutely!
That’s not the problem
Is mankind at least partially at fault for global warming?
Absolutely!
That’s not the problem either.
The problem is the people—usually self-identified as “conservative”--who refuse to admit man’s role in global warming.
The method they use to obscure the truth is a classic one—complicating the issue.
An oft-cited study from ice cores taken in the Antarctic shows a cause-and-effect relation between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and Earth’s temperature. Sure as night follows day, an increase in CO2 leads to an increase in temperature. This doesn’t happen overnight, there is a lag time of years.
That’s not too complicated.
Unfortunately, it’s been happening for thousands and thousands of years—long before man ever appeared. And, there is good evidence this cycle has repeated for hundreds of millions of years.
That’s where people start complicating the issue.
“If it was goin’ on before man got here, then man CAN’T be responsible for global warming.”
Not true.
Nobody can say with any certainty what caused natural increases in CO2 levels. Nevertheless, increased CO2 has always led to increased temperatures. CO2 levels are rising now. On this, there is no argument.
“There are scientists who can PROVE that global warming is not the result of human activity.”
I’ve heard the scientists myself, but they seldom mention that simple, little piece of evidence and over-complicate the issue. Unfortunately, this confuses people who are not scientists.
A long time ago, a scientist named Ptolemy (TAW-luh-me) “proved” that the earth was the center of the solar system and he used mathematics to do it. He confused a lot of people by complicating what was really a simple concept. The confusion lasted for almost 2,000 years.
One way to complicate the issue is to bring up other theories. Those same ice core samples reveal certain particles deposited only during times of increased solar activity. However, their deposition in the ice does not correlate with increased temperatures as neatly as an increase in CO2 does.
In my short life, CO2 levels have increased eight-and-half percent. I don’t believe one needs to be a scientist to see the connection between mankind pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and the corresponding increase in CO2 levels.
I mean, DUH!
Unfortunately, there are too many people who either can not or will not do their own thinking. They listen to people who say, “I will tell you what to think.” Ignorance is bliss, I guess. Until a hurricane destroys everything you have.
I will not argue the fact that there are natural forces at work that are causing the earth’s temperature to rise. However, to rule out the role man plays is idiotic. To argue over “how much” man contributes is lunacy. If we were to suddenly lower CO2 emissions, it would take years to have an effect. Waiting to reduce emissions will increase the severity of any temperature increase when it happens. Prolonging the inevitable is insane.
So why do they do it? Why do so-called conservatives confound the issue and confuse people?
That’s easy. Money! That is to say, greed. Pure, unbridled greed.
And therein lies a solution.
Next: the solution.
Comments
Humans are causing global warming? That's a matter of opinion, not scientific fact. Sorry Algore, that's just the truth. Maybe the climate is warming, and maybe humans have played a part, but we really don't know. Yes, we can pick and choose observations to try to scare people for political advantage, but that doesn't change the truth. We Just Don't Know.
What we do know is the climate has made great swings in the past, well before humans could ever had an effect. The smart thing is to be ready for the changes in climate and weather we already know occur. We make similar preparations when it comes to earthquakes. We also know that energy independence would be a good thing for US as the price of energy increases; in lives, influence, and dollars.
Could solar power ever be a solution to our energy woes? Sorry Virginia, not even close to being possible. Even if solar panels were made to be 99% efficient in converting sunlight to a form useful for household and transportation needs, we still don't have enough space or capital to site or make the panels. Right now mass-produced panels are less than 15% efficient.
Will solar, wind, biofuels, hydro, etc be a part of the overall picture? Yes! And I welcome that. We'll continue to see advancements in the engineering. For now, solar is only viable for sunny, remote locations, where it is too expensive to drag an extension cord from the established grid. Wind Energy is becoming economically viable, and is probably a better choice for now.
The real answer is..... oh my, I'm about to give a greenie a heart attack..... NUCLEAR! It really is cheap, clean, powerful. Nuclear plants can be made to create hydrogen and then we'll have a chance to replace oil for transportation.
===============================================
The logistics of nuclear energy scare me. Owned by the few and it comes from less-than-stable regions of the world--just like oil.
Quentin
Posted by: Frank | February 14, 2007 08:57 AM