I am going to get into trouble for this, but I am going to prove that climate change is real. Let’s look at three examples: Approximately 20,000 years ago there was 1,000 feet of ice where Seattle sits today (1). It melted, which means that the climate changed. 10,000 years ago, there was a lake in central Oregon (2). It dried up, which means that the climate changed. 400,000 years ago, there was a forest where Antarctica sits today (3). It died when it was covered in ice because the climate changed. There are many other examples, but I think you get the point from these three examples. Climate has always changed from time to time.
The current hysteria appears to be that humans are ruining the planet. I think this is probably true to some degree: we are filthy, short-sighted, selfish creatures predominately, who want to reap the benefits without having to bear the costs of fulfilling our desires. I know petroleum-based automobiles are rough on the planet, but I admit, I like having a car to drive. I have a bicycle, and I got it ready to ride in early July, but there always seems to be some good reason to drive instead. I also like electric lights and heat. I like technology: I have a cell phone, a tablet and obviously a computer to type this on. I eat meat because it tastes good to me, and I drink whole fat milk, like cheese and I love real butter. I breathe out carbon dioxide and when I pass gas it contains methane. So, like almost everyone else, I am part of the problem.
Are humans causing climate change? Well since the industrial revolution began around 1780 you can’t say we caused the climate changes I cited above. “Ah ha,” you say,” But aren’t we responsible for the current climate change? Are we? I don’t know. There seems to be evidence that increases in carbon dioxide correlate with increasing temperatures. So, we might be causing this change. Or we might be making it worse than it might have been under “natural” conditions. Or we may be making it happen faster than it would have naturally. But we must be careful because of the principle that “correlation does not always equal causation.” This means that just because two things happen and there appears to be a relationship, one is not necessarily causing the other. Here is an example: We are all born, and we will all eventually die. The two are correlated. But while birth is necessary for death to occur, birth doesn’t cause death. Similarly, while human activity certainly appears to be having an effect, are we really, really sure? I could make the case that using the correlation model humans can’t possibly be causing this climate change because it has changed so many times before when we weren’t in a position to contribute to the change at all!
I dislike the words “Climate Change.” I think they are misleading. “Climate Variability” is a more accurate description of what is going on. The evidence shows that the climate is not static. It never has been static, and it has always varied over time…usually long periods of time. Humans have adapted to these changes in the past as best we can. Sometimes it works to our advantage and we thrive. Other times it makes it impossible for our current lifestyles to be sustained and cultures crash and disappear.
So, what are we to do? Ignore it and hope it goes away? “Eat, drink and be merry because tomorrow we die”? I am going to suggest that the real problem is that we have many more people on this planet than it can sustainably support without heavy contributions of manufactured petroleum-based fertilizers, pesticides and other products. If you believe, as many do, that we are just a different species that evolved under the current favorable conditions, than we are subject to all the same rules of survival as any other species, and nature will self-correct to restore balance. Maybe the current climate change is nothing more than that self-correction – nature saying “Hey, there are just too many of you around mucking things up. Its time for me to do something to restore the balance!” Its kind of harsh, but nature doesn’t care about survival of the individual, or even survival of entire species. Just consider what happened to the dinosaurs – they died out and mammals replaced them. Maybe we are next.
Am I suggesting we continue to trash planet earth, or just give up and let it happen? No, I have spent my career working in one way or another to improve the environment, so that approach is against my basic beliefs. But I don’t believe the current ‘blame game’ is the answer either, it only makes people defensive. We need to work together to adapt to the changes that are under way. We need to develop and implement sustainable practices that are economically feasible (something we can afford to pay for). There are too many of us to allow us to continue our petty practice of “Me First!” Am I proposing a “One World Government” that controls everything? No, that would be far too dangerous and individual freedom would ultimately suffer. And I ask: “What major problem did government ever solve anyway?” They start and fight wars successfully. Government also builds roads, bridges and other expensive infrastructure; funds some research and spends lots of my tax money on projects I don’t necessarily support like windmills that visually pollute wide open spaces and kill lots of birds.
I may be over simplifying, but our founding fathers (oops, did I just use a trigger word?) believed that a federation of individual states would allow each to experiment with different approaches, and the most successful approaches would rise to the top. I still think that is a good model and I hope we can apply it, along with a little “enlightened self-interest,” before it is too late.
Kahle Jennings