"Our Planet - It Is The Only One We Have (Discussion)"
was posted on May 12, 2014. While I
received no further comments or discussion directly relating thereto, one of my
readers, Leonard Levenson, of Manhattan, NY, raised question regarding a
related subject, namely, global warming.
He asked:
Although it is
politically correct to oppose the increase in greenhouse gasses and indeed it
is clear that considerable harm results, there are some questions that have
never been answered to my satisfaction. Perhaps you can help.
1. The earth
is clearly warming causing sea levels to rise and possibly diverting the Gulf
Stream all of which could have devastating consequences to Mankind.
However, doesn't this very warming also increase the growing season for crops
in places such as Canada, Russia, Alaska, Patagonia and Greenland? Does this
not benefit large segments of mankind?
2. Doesn't the
melting of ice in the Arctic open up the long dreamed of Northwest passage of
shipping from the US and Canada to Russia and Japan?
3. The
Greenhouse effect results in inordinate amounts of rainfall, at least in the NE
US. Isn't this beneficial to agriculture, hydroelectric power and the
environment?
I responded after doing research on the subject and I set
forth below my response based on that research.
In setting forth my response, I must caution my readers
that if they read only my text they will have missed a great many facts
relating thereto, since I did not want to quote from my sources at length.
Therefor, I urge my readers to take the time to access the links and to read,
at least large portions, of the source material. My full response follows.
Politically correct
or PC has nothing to do with the science of Global Warming, any more than the
question of whether the earth is round (and yes there is a Flat Earth Society) or whether the earth is the center of the
universe.
Global Warming is a
scientific fact, and the fact that certain ignorant people, or shortsighted
billionaires, and politicians who cater to them, prefer to pretend is doesn’t
exist, doesn’t make it a political or controversial issue.
Nor is PC a way of
censoring ideas that are not liberal, as our right wing blogosphere would have
people believe, though there have been instances where misguided college
students have used it that way.
Without doubt there
may be some areas that benefit from Global Warming, such as the Northwest
Passage, but they are few. You mention an increase in the growing season in a
number of countries, assuming that cold climates would benefit from warmer
weather. Alas that is very simplistic. See for example the following which has the sub-headline:
"Insect
infestations, forest fires, floods and drought reflect the devastating impact
global warming is already having on the vast Canadian landscape, according to
experts from all 10 provinces and two territories."
BY THE GAZETTE
(MONTREAL) NOVEMBER 30, 2005
Please note that
this was almost a decade ago. A more recent assessment for Canada can be found
here.
As for more
rainfall, Hurricane Katrina is an example: See here and don’t forget Hurricane Sandy which
devastated the Northeast and we still have nowhere near recovered. But we
know that the next one will be worse and we are being forced to spend billions
on raising coastline infrastructure and getting ready for next time, which is
inevitable.
But it isn’t just
more rainfall. It is also less. See this New York Times article where the lede is:
"LOS ANGELES — The fire season here in the hot, dry
West now lasts roughly 75 days longer than it did a decade ago, and nearly
three dozen fires have been burning up and down California in the last two
days, weeks before a normal season begins."
You think of it as
more rainfall. But that isn’t it. It is the rise of the sea level that will
wipe away huge swath of land. How will it effect the Mid-Atlantic region?
See an EPA report here.
See how it is
effecting our nations’ capital. Here is today’s (May 16, 2014) weather forecast.
As for Florida
(Marco Rubio’s state) See here and allow me to quote from the assessment:
"The map clearly shows that a sea level rise of only a few meters would
inundate thousands of acres of highly developed land and beach communities
along Florida's Atlantic Coast, the Florida Keys, and the Florida Gulf Coast.
Significant flooding and environmental change would also be experienced in the
Everglades. Zoom in on Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor or another area to see the
impact of sea level rise in more detail. Florida is a low-elevation state and
would feel the impact of sea level rise associated with global climate change
much more strongly than other areas.”
In the Pacific
whole islands will become uninhabitable: See this headline in
Business Insider (not a “liberal source or a PC source) "Sea Level
Rise Will Make Several Islands Uninhabitable Within A Decade."
And finally, here is a summary for the United States, which to
be sure takes us quite far out.
But maybe the worst
part would be the endless migration of people
from negatively effected area to less effected areas - a migration
that would make the present immigration problems look puny. The result
would likely be war and the killing of immigrants to
protect the interest of the haves from the impinging hordes trying to find
shelter where they are not wanted.
I pity my grandchild
and even more the generation after that. My advise to my grandchild would be
“Don’t have children. They will be born into Hell on Earth.”
If it isn’t already
too late - it is certainly very close to that.
1 comment:
I'm afraid that many of the people who oppose either the fact of global warming or the fact of the human contribution to global warming do so because they oppose the implied interventions required. Some of these range from changing light bulbs to radically changing our dependence on fossil fuels. The government may have to get involved and that is simply anathema to some. The South, where most of the opposition to which I refer, is still resentful of the War of Northern Aggression from 1861-1865 which ended the States' Right of holding slaves and they remain suspicious of government intervention of any kind.
Post a Comment