On May 19, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
This article makes a fair case for the theory that humans are
indeed changing climates and weather patterns. However, the earth
has already proven itself capable of maintaining overall balance
over millions of years, even in the face of forest fires,
volcanoes, meteorites, and so on. What makes the scientists think
the earth can't correct itself this time, like it has every other
time?
I think, among sane people, the concern is not so much for the earth
surviving as much as it is for the earth remaining in a state that
allows humans to continue living somewhat prosperously. Obviously
the earth is not going to explode or anything thanks to our
pollution, but it's clear that mass extinctions have occurred in the
past, and it would really suck for humans to be among the fallen in
the next extinction event.
But like it's been pointed out before, it's not entirely clear that
our pollution will significantly alter the course of global climate
change. The stakes are pretty high, though, so I think it's worth
seriously considering. If changing our pollution and consumption
patterns added an extra thousand or two years to this habitable
portion of the earth's climate cycle, wouldn't it be worth it?
Anyway, I don't expect to see hard answers to any of this in my
lifetime, so meanwhile we'll just have to debate with estimates and
projections.
--Levi
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
