|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Jan 20, 2010 3:37 pm |
|
re: re: re: The Reality of Climate Change - Discipline in this network |
| abbeboulah
| |
Let's see if we can get a little more global view of this thing.
A phenomenon is recognized:
Changes are observed in the environment:
1 Air is getting polluted
2 Water is getting polluted (rives, lakes, oceans)
3 Species of plants and animals are disappearing
4 Soil is depleted and polluted with fertilizers
5 Forests are disappearing
6 Polar icecaps are melting
7 Glaciers are melting,
8 Holes develop in the ozone layer
9 Precipitation goes sour (aka acid rain) killing vegetation
etc.
This is happening at the same time human activity is increasing, and 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9 are obviously directly related to human activity. So some people are beginning to suspect that 3, 6, 7 might have something to do with human activity as well. They try to find common measures that link those activities with the effects. Some suspect there is a common denominator in that CO2 levels are consistently rising in correlation with human activity, and try to find data to support this hunch.
Meanwhile, people get worried about the whole set of items above, and realize that if it goes on unabated, the effects will get cumulatively worse in the future. They try to raise support for doing something. They seize on the suspected global warming denominator as an argument to get humanity to change the problematic activities. The changes include recommendations to use less fossil fuels which are the main contributors to rising CO2 levels in the air.
We now see some reactions:
A.
Any consequence of such change would have economic implications. Specifically, the industries involved in the exploitation of fossil fuels are getting nervous that they will lose the basis of their considerable profits they have earned from this activity. So they are resisting the proposed changes, and support efforts by scientists who want to poke holes in the hypothesis that global warming is the main culprit and that it is caused by human activity -- which would allow those industries to keep doing what they are doing, and profiting from it.
B.
Any consequence of changes to human activities affecting 1 through 9 will require better coordination and control of activities on a global scale. This seems to require an improved or more effective form of global governance. People who are now exerting much of global domination are concerned about losing their influence, as are any folks who suspect that any entities with great power (including the existing ones) are liable to abuse it, knowing that we have yet to find really effective means to control power. So both of these groups resist implementation of the changes -- but for different reasons.
C.
Any significant changes in the human activities suspected of influencing the listed effects will require significant funding. Equally, many of the means of controlling and enforcing the implementation of activity changes and CO2 generation, for example, involve financial aspects, which ultimately will have to be paid for by somebody. The predominant payer -- whether in the short or long run -- will be the taxpayers. So there is an understandable concern about what those financial burdens will be -- and those who are also worried about justice and equality, have justifiable suspicions about who will end up with all that money.
Would the controversy be resolved by conclusive data as to whether human activity also causes global warming? (Which I have suggested we are in no position to do on this forum) If it would be demonstrated that global warming is indeed influenced by human activity, the people in group A would still be concerned and opposed to the proposed necessary changes. Do they have any convincing suggestions as to what should be done instead? Conversely: what if it were conclusively shown that global warming is not caused by human activity? (In this case, by the way, the puzzling contradiction in the argument would have to be cleared up: on the one hand, it is claimed that there IS no global warming -- but then why are the ice caps disappearing? On the other hand, there are the arguments that global warming is a naturally occurring phenomenon that happens after every ice age or so anyway, -- so which is it?) So that would eliminate human activity as causing 6 and 7, maybe 3? But then what about items 1,2,4,5,8,9... ? Would there be necessary changes to deal with those? Would these changes be largely the same as those proposed for dealing with global warming? (So that Gore et al. just used the wrong justification for things that need to be done anyway, for a number of other arguable reasons?) Or would those changes be different? What are the ideas for this, and have any parties proposed solutions that should be discussed?
As for concerns (B): If any global coordination is needed for various reasons including or excluding measures to deal with global warming, and there are legitimate concerns about the desirability and effectiveness as well as the possibility of controlling the power of a global governance entity: what are the alternative proposals for addressing this concern? Can we rely of ‘free market’ mechanisms? Who will guarantee that the markets are really free? (Back to square 1?) Are they saying that there should be no change -- that the US should keep this role of de facto global control it has tried so hard to maintain for the past half century? Or let evolution take its course here as well, which probably means that China will soon be it?
About concerns (C): Some actually suspect that regardless of which side is going to ‘win’ on the global warming issue, things are already rigged nicely enough for the same entities to walk away with the profits in the end. (This is due to the widely if not universally accepted mechanisms of financing, growth, interest etc. that govern the global money flow). But what, if any serious ideas are out there that should be discussed in connection with this environmental impact issue?
The global warming debate may be a grand diversionary manipulation: the strings are being pulled behind the scenes by entities who are serious about maintaining control and getting the benefits (profits) from whatever we are going to do, regardless of what that might be.
These issues are a bit more serious than the fun and games about winning or losing a mudwrestling debate on a social forum. But if that’s what y’all are looking for here: have fun, guys.
Private Reply to abbeboulah (new win) |
|
| |
|
