Is carbon dioxide in the atmosphere bad?
Let me start off by stating that I personally believe that global warming is a real phenomenon, and that its cause is the buildup of green-house gasses in the atmosphere. I don't know to what extent that buildup is the cause of human agencies, and I don't care. I do not care if it is natural, or unnatural. The natural/unnatural dichotomy is essentially meaningless in nearly every case.
I also believe that reducing the amount of carbon dioxide released by our industries is a good idea, and may reverse or at least mitigate the effects of global warming. I don't know that it would, but it is certainly worth a try. This is however not the reason I posed the opening question.
What I want to know, is if it is wise to instill a negative connotation on greenhouse gasses. After all, if we know anything from the geological history of our planet we know that drastic climate change is truly the norm. What may be now a beneficial policy of reduction of green-house gasses could be detrimental down the road a few hundred years if we demonize carbon dioxide whole cloth.
Nor should we delude ourselves into thinking that what we want is the natural balance. Geological history tells us the planet has no "normal" climate. Instead, I propose that we admit to ourselves that what we ideally need to do is take the global climate under human control, to keep it in the zone that is most beneficial to us. Us being the majority of the species that are extant on the planet at the moment. Because we know that these major shifts in climate that have occurred in the past correlate with mass extinctions.
I'm not really here to argue the question as posed, but rather to ask another. Are we, as the human species, truly so arrogant as to believe that we have the capability to control the climate? The carbon dioxide is more of a result of CFC's in the atmosphere. One little volcanic eruption and our whole plan would be put into question.
ReplyDeleteThis is not to say that we should not take better care of our wastes, but perhaps we should not begin to ponder planetary climate control when most people cannot even control their own budgets.
If we were to go with some sort of governing body to control it, that opens up an entirely new (and very scary) can of worms.
Once again, this is not to say that I agree or disagree with the need for some control of our wastes, but rather to question the ability to control an entire planets climate.
I'm not so sure that we are unable to control our climate, The United States probably has enough thermonuclear devices to plunge the world into nuclear winter (I do not, by the way, propose we put this to the test).
ReplyDeleteHowever, you may very well be correct, that the percentage of free greenhouse gasses attributed to human agents is so small as to be lost in the noise, making our efforts at present futile.
I do believe, perhaps in our lifetime, that humanity will be able to control our climate. Do we want our great great grandchildren thinking "CO2 = Bad" even after the global warming crisis has been averted. We do need to grow up and stop thinking in such facile binary fictions, and realize that today's demon may be tomorrow's savior.
Just to make one point, I do not advocate any sort of governing body controlling the climate. Governmental organizations are seldom able to control themselves, and when they can, they invariably try to extend there control over everything else.