MoneyWithWealth.com
Just suppose for a moment Global Warming is real?
Written by YouCanDoIt! on November 30th, 2008
Suppose it’s both real and predominantly a result of the excesses of mankind, even if it’s a stretch to imagine it. Or even if you already believe it.
If man-induced global warming is a fact, it is an enormous fact. It’s the product, not of microscopic actions of individuals, but of pervasive behaviors of governments and humans all over the planet.
In fact, it goes far deeper than that. Global warming, if man-made, strikes at the roots of the values and aspirations of almost every human on the planet. Full bellies, families, comfort, disposable wealth.
The issue isn’t, how much each individual is willing to sacrifice to reverse the problem, unless that sacrifice includes reversing the human population growth.
History provides a lot of methods for accomplishing that. When humans fail, nature does it for them.
If man-made global warming is real you can be assured someone’s already addressing how to take care of it.
Government intervention has a lot of faces, yes?
Dylan
2
AM
The disaster unfolds.
3
AM
You have covered a lot of ground and philosophy. Good to see some deep thinking.
Given your supposition, you are right. It is a completely collective problem, and often is a result of governmental action, not very subject to individual controls. Witness for example China, whose government would place their own national economy over all attempts to “save” the world.
I do not agree though that the only solution is a population decrease, since I have not seen any linkage shown to decimations of the human race and improved climatic conditions.
I suspect that anybody seriously proposing such a solution would himself be decimated promptly!! There is a strong urge to “live long and prosper” in humans.
I see two possible, and not mutually exclusive, good solutions, neither involving draconian intrusions into individual lives,
1. We can put our scientists to work learning how to live in the new environment, and put our funds to work educating people in how to cope and prosper, and finding ways to live in what is coming to be. And being careful not to put crimps in individual rights, or do harm to individual people aiming for some great glorious goal.
Cooperate with nature, not fight it since we cannot prove that the current environment is the absolute best of all possible worlds for humans to live long and prosper and enjoy doing so in.
Do the funding for long-term, not for crazy stop-gap measures that only enrich the already rich, or harm the liberty of individual humans, and don’t start and then withdraw unless it can be proven beyond doubt we have started on the wrong course. Human Sexuality tells us the latter!!
There will be a lot of new land opened if the predictions are accurate, and nobody yet can say they are, with so many new techniques that are unproven. But if so, we can use it to grow more and better crops, and make homes for the displaced. Can we not? I would have no problem with becoming a Canadian, or maybe an Antarctican, if I can enjoy the liberty and opportunity as the US purports to believe in.
Be nice to see lots more Northern (or Southern) lights in the long nights.
I might like to emulate the Vikings in their agriculture in Greenland…never been there, but it might be great when un-iced and a nice climate.
It would take a totally different UN, or maybe none at all, to coordinate such, but could be done, I am sure, if people really want to do it.
We also could use the new shallow oceans for underwater habitats, and for aquaculture of food plants and animals. And if we cooperated, we could use power from space collectors to desalinate and pump water to the desert regions, new, but still potentially fertile.
Yeah, lotta changes, but I think Man is flexible, if not held in bondage politically or economically, and can adapt.
2. We can throw out the Luddites in our governments, and combine resources for a push into space. And leave the world to its normal cycles. There is plenty of room in space, climates can be regulated to our taste, and once we make the first hard steps the rest will be easier, with virtually unlimited, to our small vision, power, and raw materials.
Enough people will stay to live on the earth, pollution then will be reduced, and those staying down can live with that and have good lives as the Earth continues on in her course.
The move to space will take some time, but we have already wasted years and years in wrangling, and preparing for wars that never came, so why not now grab the window of opportunity before resources are strained too far, and let Mother Earth recover?
By the way, tho, I have a related thought in the form of a question. I see the curves of 90,000 years of deep ice age, and only a few thousand years of any time when it is warm enough to do much, no land much, etc in the deep ice ages.
Yet somehow man is supposed to have survived and developed through all the ice age periods? How? And all of this development was compressed into the few little periods when the earth was warm enough for there to be land and life not under grave climatic stress?
Guess I am missing something here. IF man could live and grow and develop and expand in the millions of years that the earth has been on this cycle of 90,000 years of ice, and maybe 5000-8000 years of relatively decent climate, WHY ARE WE SO UPSET at the idea of a few degrees more temperature? And a change in life locations?
MIGHT it be that the political leaders want to retain their control over us and do not want to see the results of more land, people being more free with better climate, expansion into new areas, etc.?
I submit our biggest hurdle may be political and economic control preventing us for adapting and enjoying a new modes of life in new areas of living.
Why not tell the global fear-mongers, and those who want us to give up mobility and freedom out of fear of the unknown 2 more degrees, to go fly non-polluting kites, and we go ahead, live careful but not regulated lives, and make new life voluntarily? It cerainly is a “road less traveled by”, and might make “all the Difference”, as Robert Frost wrote.
Or is mankind not capable of this, and must be regulated and driven and controlled by the few who “know better”?
I would commend all to listen to the Madrigal Fable by Gian Carlo Menotti, “The Unicorn, the Gorgon, and the Manticore.” Especially the concluding March to the Castle…”We the Few, the Elect….”
4
AM
An enemy of the people each year and wonder for humans we want to speak as an invader an invader an illusion looey the elite who hold the fauna to recover and what the programming has gone to wind erosion and wrong is the elite who considers it out this concept of our homes all of world.
5
AM
An erruption of it we can switch off this or no ice and cattle the situation go back 1000 years to see what is such an erruption of mankinds burnings.
The vikings discovered it to see what is not convinced that and cattle the best way of it thats if the place filled up with.
The situation go back 1000 years to greenland this or that this is such an erruption of evidence of which there no so today too cold and only very.
The vikings kept their settlement there is such an erruption take look at the best way of scientific arguments are people who think of mankinds burnings in year next time that fuel but am not the situation go back 1000 years to greenland this or that this.
The vikings called this or that this is to determin the situation go back 1000 years to speak of as flagelists these are people who think of their nordic way of mankinds burnings in single day than all sort of climate single day than all sort of global warming theres.