It’s a matter of prescience…

No, not the science fiction kind
It’s all about ignorance,
and greed, and miracles for the blind
the media parading, disjointed politics
founded on petrochemical plunder
and we’re its hostages

Bad Religion – Kyoto Now!

Bye bye energy bill. It’s been no secret for years that a higher level of carbon emissions are being pumped into our planet’s ozone layer, and anyone remotely connected to the scientific community knows why this is a potentially disastrous thing.

Notice that I say “potentially” rather than absolutely when I allude to the scientific community; this is because I have a basic understanding of how the scientific process works. There is no such thing as scientific “proof” either for or against global warming. Global warming is a hypothesis, which means it must be tested again and again. Scientists have pointed to several hard-to-deny trends that help to verify this hypothesis may be correct: 1) sea levels have been rising for the past 100 years thanks to run-off from glaciers that have been melting and general thermal warming, and these increases have been extensively documented thus making them nearly impossible to refute; 2) a higher concentration of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide have a “trapping” effect where the heat coming into the earth’s atmosphere from the sun stays inside our ozone layer and produces a warming effect; if we’re pumping a higher level of those greenhouse gases into our atmosphere daily, then logically this trapping effect will continue to intensify and create an even greater warming effect than we’re already experiencing.

It may never be fully proven, but we can draw some educated conclusions about how we, as a human race, should proceed in response to the ever-increasing level of carbon emissions that are pumped into our atmosphere daily. And why, exactly, is it not better to be safe than sorry when it comes to the climate change bill? Why do we, as a species, continue to ignore what may be a catastrophe if its effects are fully realized? Yes, it is possible that the global warming hypothesis will never be “proven” according to the layperson’s definition, but do we really want it to be proven before we act? Do we really want to wait until the worst implications of this hypothesis come to fruition before we decide to curtail our contributions to the problem? Part of this heated debate (see what I did there?) is over whether or not humanity can be blamed for some or all of the effect. So what?!? There’s no denying that we contribute to the greenhouse effect. Why not curtail what we have control over? Why is that so difficult? Even as we battle record-breaking temperatures in New York (and heading towards the hottest summer on record), proposed legislation that was designed to curtail the greenhouse effect was tabled earlier today because of what else? Politics. Why flirt with disaster if it can be prevented?


One response to “It’s a matter of prescience…

  1. I feel similar to you on this topic. Whether climate change is real or not (which the majority of scientists say it is real), what’s wrong with going to the extra mile to take care of our planet? How can minimizing our impact backfire on us any more than trashing our planet might?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s