The problem with climate change is that most of the arguments are about whether it's happening or not. Other than the supposed bad effect on polar bear and the rising levels effecting low areas, there are not many analysis of the actual effects, good and bad, of changes.
First, is the assumption that the way it was let's say 50 years ago is the optimum kind of weather. Who says? It may be the climate that we're use too. But without actually living in other climate conditions, we may find that there are better conditions that we experienced in the past. It would be a very large coincidence if the climate was optimal in world history 50 years ago. We may find that slightly warmer is better. Certainly the mini ice age we had a few centuries ago or the big Ice Age we had 12000 years ago that covered half the northern hemisphere were certainly worse than any thing we have now.
Regarding warming, sure, it may effect the polar bear. (As an aside, the polar bear population has been expanding and the main problem is if it's too cold after the winter in the spring so that seals, the bear's main prey, don't find breathing holes. With frozen expanses, the bear's newborn die for lack of food as there are no seals around. It turns out that warmer winters and springs are better for the bears and seals). Warming climates in the tundra and other northern areas and rising tree lines up mountains will allow for expansion of other species including trees, insects, brown and grizzly bears, flowers, etc. Even more space to plant food and for human expansion. It seems that we've assumed the changes of a warming climate are all negative. That just isn't true and it does a disservice to only concentrate on the climate itself and negative changes only. I don't think studies have covered the positive effects. Of course it's always more interesting to worry about meteors crashing into the earth and destroying it. All our disaster movies follow this theme. It more boring to study normal and positive processes.
Alan,
What's your problem with climate change? It's unclear whether you're saying it isn't happening, whether you admit that it is, or whether you are simply saying that it's all going to be better when it gets warmer. Or, alternatively, that it doesn't matter? Hedging your verbal bets reaches a point where you are better saying nothing than saying a lot of stuff that's neither one thing nor the other, and is, to be generous, simply regurgitated political catechism with all the intentional opaqueness of that.
Polar bears are just one easily identified, cuddly example that unlike the reality of the beast, is also a warm and cosy idea to which to cleave in ahhh!... moments.
Forget friggin' bears: think people and countries. Think the Ganges delta; think the Maldives; think Florida, Louisiana and no doubt parts of Texas, and if you were to care, my present home town.
Give a thought to Africa and the expanding deserts. It's sometimes said that Africa starts in the South of France. Doesn't your local tv service show you what's happening to millions in Sudan and Somalia, today, or is the latter (Somalia), in the States, all about heroes in Black Hawk helicopters going bang, bang, bang! and sometimes getting themselves killed for their efforts?
The reality of what's
already happening is a tragedy of unimaginable proportions, and unless you are happy to say okay, but starvation is just nature's way to control population figures, then you
must take account of what man is contributing. It isn't an argument about what nature is or is not contributing to the equation; it's about what humanity can do to avert, mitigate - and at the very least, slow down ultimate disaster not just in the low lands and the far away lands, but right in your own neck of the woods too.
Ice Ages are not the point: nobody is offering to stop them or to bring them back for the skiing crowd; even the Italian Alps are now losing their glaciers in a song of sympathy and harmony with the Andes and Himalayas. What it's about is, to repeat, humanity making an effort to stop things from getting worse more quickly.
I don't think short-term US economic figures are worth the rest of the world's future. Jesus, even China, yes, soulless China is accepting the problem and trying to do something major about it.
Head tucked deep in the sand won't stop your ass frying in that sunshine, believe me. And don't imagine you'll be safe in any fortress America: your own folks have the guns - and the will to use them - should their food sources start to become unreliable. They already use their weapons to devastating effect for far less than that. And where do you imagine the armed forces, police and National Guard sympathies are going to be when their own families start to feel the pressure on food and basic survival?
You've had one civil war already; are you geared up for the next? Reckon Mr T will wave his zillions of bucks and 'fix' it - fixing it is what he said he does didn't he? He wouldn't be around to be seen - he'd be off somewhere altogether more pleasant at the drop of a hat. Because
he could.
Rob
