Deny,deny,deny…at OUR peril

1880-2009 global mean surface temperature diff...

Image via Wikipedia

We are playing Russian roulette with features of the planet’s atmosphere that will profoundly impact generations to come. How long are we willing to gamble?- David Suzuki
 

It seems that believing in global warming or climate change is like being pregnant. Either you are or you’re not. Either you believe that humans are causing this or you don’t. I believe MAN-MADE global warming is really happening because a VAST majority of very smart scientists think that greenhouse gases are proving to be a major problem for our planet. I have to rely on people who have expertise in this field, just like we rely on them when we build rocket ships to the moon or Mars or to infinity and beyond. I know full well there were skeptics who thought that we would never be able to reach the moon, but the science said we could. Now I know that climate science is a hair different. I’m willing to concede the science is not fool-proof or exact enough for anyone’s liking. There are some who disagree on data and I submit that they are worth hearing, but when you take the whole blooming lot of them, across the entire world, MOST of them agree. WE are a contributing factor. Period. Now, that leads me to the reason for my post today. I think I will scream and throw myself on the floor in an honest-to-goodness, mouth-foaming, hissy fit if I hear or read ONE more person say something witty like, “yeah, that’s some real global warming for ya” as they are plowing out from a snowdrift . If that’s you then I’m begging you to please read this article provided through a link in the opening sentence of my post which will explain a bit about why snowfall or temperatures that make you go, “brrrrrrrr” somewhere DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE CLIMATE IS NOT WARMING. IT MAY EVEN PROVE IT. Climate does not equal weather. Look it up. I swear, I just can’t take the lack of knowledge on this issue (remember how some climate denying congressmen were mocking Al Gore after a snow event last year?). No. I mean it, I’m gonna lose my stuff. I also really have a huge problem with the deniers for a very basic reason. If you choose to believe the nay-sayers, that’s your right. It’s still America. I mean, people still smoke who I’m sure don’t think it leads to cancer. “Aunt Bertha smoked for 50 years and didn’t get cancer dang-gummet!”. Great. Good for Aunt Bertha. However, that tiny snippet of wisdom proves the difference between climate and weather. Aunt Bertha is like the weather. The 100 other people who did die from cancer all over the country are like climate. See how this works? However, my question to you is this. What if I am wrong? What is the worst outcome? Are you worried we will not live to our fullest, Hummer-driving, Wall Street gazillion-dollar-bonus-taking CEO, McMansion living, best-est, capitalist selves? Will our standard of living be so compromised that we will have to resort to living in mud huts and saddling up old Bessie to get to town? Hardly. As a matter-of-fact, there might be some obvious positive outcomes like less pollution and new business opportunitiess. But let’s turn the tables. What if I am right and you are wrong? What is the worst possible outcome? I shudder to think of it. I say, let’s err on the side of caution because the alternative is unthinkable. Unfortunately, time is not on our side.

 ~ Ignoring climate change will be the most costly of all possible choices, for us and our children ~ Peter Ewins

Advertisements

About Blithering Idiot

I am a teacher and I love my job.
This entry was posted in Environment, Humor, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Deny,deny,deny…at OUR peril

  1. rogerthesurf says:

    Jody, don’t be shy about publishing this, there are no lies in this comment are there?

    I will also publish this under your url on my other site http://www.globalwarmingsupporter.wordpress.com where my readers will be interested to read your reply.
    Of course no reply has a host of meaning as well.

    I think that we are in the grip of the biggest and most insane hoax in history, and unless the public get wise to it soon, we will all be parted from what wealth we have.

    Lets take a simple economic view of what is likely to happen.

    In the absence of sufficient alternative solutions/technologies, the only way western countries can ever attain the IPCC demands of CO2 emissions reduced to 40% below 1990 levels, (thats about 60% below todays) is to machine restrictions on the use of fossil fuels. Emission Trading schemes are an example.

    As the use of fossil fuels is roughly linear with anthropogenic CO2 emissions, to attain a 60% reduction of emissions , means about the same proportion of reduction of fossil fuel usage, including petrol, diesel, heating oil, not to mention coal and other types including propane etc.

    No matter how a restriction on the use of these is implemented, even a 10% decrease will make the price of petrol go sky high. In otherwords, (and petrol is just one example) we can expect, if the IPCC has its way, a price rise on petrol of greater than 500%.
    First of all, for all normal people, this will make the family car impossible to use. Worse than that though, the transport industry will also have to deal with this as well and they will need to pass the cost on to the consumer. Simple things like food will get prohibitively expensive. Manufacturers who need fossil energy to produce will either pass the cost on to the consumer or go out of business. If you live further than walking distance from work, you will be in trouble.
    All this leads to an economic crash of terrible proportions as unemployment rises and poverty spreads.
    I believe that this will be the effect of bowing to the IPCC and the AGW lobby. AND as AGW is a hoax it will be all in vain. The world will continue to do what it has always done while normal people starve and others at the top (including energy/oil companies and emission traders) will enjoy the high prices.

    Neither this scenario nor any analysis of the cost of CO2 emission reductions is included in IPCC literature, and the Stern report which claims economic expansion is simply not obeying economic logic as it is known in todays academic world.

    The fact that the emission reduction cost issue is not discussed, leads me to believe that there is a deliberate cover up of this issue. Fairly obviously the possibility of starvation will hardly appeal to the masses.

    AGW is baloney anyway!

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

    • Jodi Witt says:

      “Jody, don’t be shy about publishing this, there are no lies in this comment are there?”
      Roger, I have no idea if there are any lies in your post. I appreciate your views, but with all due respect, I find your skeptical alarmism on par with fossil fuel industry scare tactics. You know, the one’s that fund much of the denier’s playbooks. I am no scientist, only a middle-aged teacher from NJ, but as I stated in my post, I am relying on the VAST scientific consensous that dominates the field today. If you are a non-believer, and you feel that you know more than roughly 99% of the rest of the world’s intelligencia, that is your right. I also liken your theories to the car maker industry back when Ralph Nadar was pushing for car safety. They all screamed that cars would never be affordable if you made the car manufacturers include (gasp) seat-belts, or down the line, (horrors) air-bags Only rich people would be able to afford cars. How did that turn out? How about the tobacco industry who, for decades, squashed every plausible research on the link between cancer and cigarettes. How did that all turn out? Was the scientific community wrong?
      http://www.denialism.com/2007/03/what-is-denialism.html
      “In the absence of sufficient alternative solutions/technologies, the only way western countries can ever attain the IPCC demands of CO2 emissions reduced to 40% below 1990 levels, (thats about 60% below todays) is to machine restrictions on the use of fossil fuels.”
      “In the absence of sufficient alternative solutions/technologies…”
      Well there’s a mouthful. Precisely what we are fighting for is “sufficient alternative solutions/technologies”! My goodness, we should have started this back about 8 presidencies ago when Nixon actually called for getting off of our addiction to oil. Imagine where we might be today if we had actually had FORESIGHT and the guts to do the right thing and invest in” alternative solutions/technologies”? Unfortunately, one of the markers of being human is holding off until tomorrow what you can do today. Procrastnate and obfuscate.
      “The world will continue to do what it has always done while normal people starve and others at the top (including energy/oil companies and emission traders) will enjoy the high prices.”
      I also find interesting that you fear that people will starve. Are you aware the United States military is already planning for the disasters that global warming may bring? The unrest and social upheaval will be a reality if the trends are ignored. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/us/15warm.html?_r=1
      What about the effects on the coral reefs from warming? Where does that fit in your scientific quandry?
      http://www.suite101.com/content/global-warming-effects-on-coral-reef-ecosystems-a166688
      In conclusion, I guess I believe that we should be working toward reasonable and effective solutions to a problem which is, really, at this point about as unanimous a consensus worl-wide as you can get. I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THOUGHTFUL, HONEST LEADERS CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE WITHOUT MAKING US ALL STARVE TO DEATH. You could post numbers, charts, graphs ad nauseum to try to convince me, but I have to stand by the other 99% of concerned scientists and universities and think-tanks who totally disagree with you, Roger. You don’t believe there is a problem and that for some reason, the world’s scientists have decided to play a hoax so that the oil companies and governments can get rich? I don’t understand the whole hoax thing. But, many people believe that 911 was an inside job and some even think Elvis is still alive. I wish he was. And I wish global warming was a hoax. But I fear it’s not. Thanks for your reply.
      http://risingtide.org.uk/hallofshame
      http://www.greenbiz.com/climate

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s