John's Blog: Thoughts on Climate Change
Everyone and his dog has a 'blog these days, right? So why not me? If you are interested in anything I'm saying, great! Let's talk about it! (Leave comments.) If not, try one of my other links. Better yet, why are you wasting your time staring at your computer screen, go do something real!
Let me know if you'd like to be to be updated whenever I post a new article. It won't happen every day!
Thoughts on Climate Change
(Click title to read more...)Let's go with these:
- Is something happening?
- Are we causing it?
- Can we do anything about it?
- Will it be good or bad overall?
- What should our response be?
I made up a table of all combinations of possible answers to these questions, with the result below. I have compressed similar combinations down to one where applicable, to make it easer to digest.
| Scenario # | Is Something Happening? | Will It Be Good or Bad Overall? | Can We Do Anything About It? | Are We Causing It? | Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | No | - | - | - | No problem. |
| 2 | Yes | Good | (why would we, if it's good?) | (doesn't matter, if we don't need to do anything about it) | Well, I guess it's okay then. |
| 3 | Yes | Bad | Yes | (doesn't matter, as long as we can do something about it) | Better get on the stick! |
| 4 | Yes | Bad | No | (doesn't matter, if there's nothing we can do about it) | Sucks to be us. |
I have a couple of observations on this, especially the "bad" scenarios. One, note that it doesn't really matter whether we are causing it or not, because what really matters is whether we can do anything about it. Even if we are causing it, if we can't do anything about it, that point is moot (#4). And even if we're not causing it, as long as we can still do something about it, then we should (#3).
But also note that if we are causing it, then we theoretically could just stop what we are doing, which would make it #3. But if we don't have the political will and/or economic ability to do that, then we drop to #4.
Now, let's map these scenarios to their traditional advocates. "Liberals" (in quotes to indicate stereotyping) tend to gravitate to scenario #3: It'll be Bad, Real Bad, but we can do something about it if we really want to. "Conservatives", in my experience, can and do argue any of the other 3 scenarios: Not happening, can't do anything about it even if it is, or hey, it might end up being a good thing! Resisting the urge to go off into a tangent about the psychological reasons behind each of these positions, let's go on and review the assumptions.
Is something happening? Most articles that I've seen indicate that most evidence affirms that it is. I think any credible scientist would admit that some of the details are contradictory, but there is a nevertheless a discernable pattern. If all the facts don't fit the hypothesis, maybe a new hypothesis is needed, but that doesn't dispute the facts. Common sense is not the same as science, but science doesn't invalidate common sense either.
Will it be good or bad overall? I think this is the huge question mark. It's obvious to me that no one really knows. I'm can't claim that I know that it will be bad. But I also can't accept anyone else's assurances that it won't be. Most likely, it will be a mix of both. However, whether good or bad, there will obviously have to be some adaptation. This actually seems to approximate the Bush administration's response to their own report on the subject back in the Spring of 2002. My concern with concentrating only on adaptation, and not on prevention, is that adaptation will be hardest, as usual, on the poor, uneducated, or otherwise unfortunate. This wouldn't be so hard to swallow if I didn't suspect that many among the wealthy, educated, or otherwise fortunate classes just aren't willing to take the hit on preventative measures, or lack the imagination to see that preventative measures could be just as economically stimulating as adaptative ones.
Can we do anything about it? I think there are two facets of this question: scientific and political. Scientifically, is there a solution? In order to answer this, the science needs to make better progress on answering the previous two questions. It isn't there yet. Secondly, as to the political will, I hope that we would, but my cynical side is not counting on it.
My overall feeling is this: If we strongly suspect that something is happening, which I think we do, do we really need to know all the details about if it will be good or bad, or what can be done, to at least stop doing what we think may be causing it? Yes, there is a lot of uncertainty reflected in that phrasing, but this is all about probabilities, because by the time we reach 100% certainty, it will likely be too late. So shouldn't we be erring on the side of caution? That's all I'm saying, really.
0 comments
0 Comments:
Blog Index
