Global Warming

I watched a TIVO of Tom Brokaw's "Global Warming: What You Need to Know." I was afraid to see it, as lefty Tom, I would expect, would present the usual biased view on one of the left's major issues. There is no way I'm going to attend Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," as I know it will be full of Gore self-aggrandizement, bad science, and alarmist propaganda. I was pleasantly surprised with Brokaw, however. Though he sprinkled the piece with plenty of the usual leftist alarmism, he also presented at least some of the truth, which is what I am all about.

A couple things I still disagree with, however. First, no leftist piece, and this one was no different, presents scientists from the opposing view. Second, well, I'll get to this at the end.

After seeing this piece, with all the glaciers melting and such, I buy the fact that we are in a period of global warming. I also buy that CO2 levels in the atmosphere have risen along with the temperature. I saw no proof, however, of a causal relationship, at least as it was presented. In other words, are rising CO2 levels causing global warming, or is it a result of it?

The question arises, and Brokaw did at least try to deal with this, are we just in another natural cycle of warming, or is mankind affecting it for the worse? I’m almost convinced that we do have something to do with it. Again, though, I’d like to hear from the scientists who disagree with this.

If we are causing global warming with our emissions of greenhouse gases, I am willing to go green to a certain extent, as I love nature and the quality of life as much as any liberal. I don’t want the polar bears to go extinct. I will not be happy if Katrina becomes a recurring event.

The Brokaw piece, though, hinted that none of the scientists knows for sure the future course of global warming. A slight tilt in the earth’s orbit can even lower temperatures worldwide 1 degree, which could start a cycle of events leading to another ice age. To me, this means that global warming would then be a good thing. It could save us from going the way of the wooly mammoth. Still, the consensus of scientists, they say, is that global warming is real, and will continue to get worse. So, fine, let’s go green. But let’s do it rationally, without panic. We don’t need to go all the way to Kyoto. Also, the U.S. might be the major culprit in the warming now, but China and India will become major players in this very soon, and we’ll have to figure out what to do with them on this issue. You can’t very well tell them to stay in the Stone Age.

Lastly, no one on earth seems to realize, except me it seems, that there is another factor in all this. Population. Do the math. How much CO2 will be pumped into the atmosphere when the U.S. census reaches 600 million, as opposed to 300 million? Even if you get 80 miles per gallon, average, 600 million people will throw out a lot of greenhouse gases. Plus, expanding human populations are largely responsible for the disappearance of the Amazon rain forest, the extinction of animal species in Africa, and even the diminished populations of the Atlantic salmon.

The right pooh-poohs the harm of over-population. The left won’t tackle this issue because it would offend some of its constituents, like the burgeoning Hispanic base. Capitalism, in fact, in order to grow, needs an ever-increasing number of people. This is one of the major flaws of the system.

What are the solutions? Fine, let’s go green to an extent, but we don’t need to go hog-wild. Second, and this is Rock’s contribution, we need to worry about overpopulation. This planet might seem big to us at times, but there is a limit to intelligent growth, capitalism notwithstanding. Plus, remember that global warming might save us when the next ice age comes a threatening. Let’s hear from all the scientists, not just the lefties.

This Post's Technorati Tags: environment , global warming, greenhouse effect, CO2 levels, overpopulation , extinction, Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, truth