Climate Change Is Not The (Only) Issue

Great posts Mark!

Sandra mentions above that the main problem is Overpopulation and all other issues come from this one. But the main one is really EDUCATION. Overpopulation is a consequence of lack of education in the world.

An educated society will know how to balance the world's population, how to combat poverty, what hurts the environment and what doesn't, and among many other things, an educated society will bring peace to the world by integrating all the positive aspects that unite us as a planet instead of focusing on our differences.

I believe we have wasted so many valuable resources and time in unnecessary wars and destruction that could have been avoided if people were educated enough to be open to other cultures, other political ideologies, religious beliefs, etc. But the leaders who selfishly desire a world domination are also promoting the same behavior on their populations. And so we're taking steps backwards.

We take steps backwards when our country puts more importance on military power than on educational strength. We take steps backwards when our economical system helps a few companies dominate all the corners of the world rather than helping promote regional growth on companies that focus on the improvement of their local communities.

How can a population be prepared to open businesses, to generate jobs, to create the new inventions the world needs to move forward if our political leaders continue cutting the budgets for education and research? Without education our society will become a burden rather than a powerful contributor to the world.

Well, my point is clear. We need more and more education; you can never have an over educated society. All the best.

Ricardo

Good point Ricardo - education is such a critical factor. As populations increase their level of education they also grow their economy and improve the level of health and life span. For every dollar spent, many dollars are returned to the society as a whole.

Global Patriot

Thanks for the nice reply. :)

"Should the United States, through military action, remove those individuals?"

That's the rub, you know? Power is intoxicating so I'm not sure what peaceful methods could be used to get rid of them, and their cronies, and replace them with something beneficial to their people. Giving them billions of dollars through some kind of climate apology certainly won't do it and it won't help the people. I'm sure though that the money they receive would be a great boon to the "We Build Palaces" industry.

"As to climate change..."
Check with your local commercial greenhouse and ask why they boost CO2 as high as they do. Check the CO2 measurements inside most buildings and note how much higher it is than outside. Check with NASA and ask why the satellites show green biomass increasing significantly as CO2 increases. Check with all the peer-reviewed papers which say doubling CO2 will increase plant yields by 30-60% (that's crops, forests might see even higher increases.)

So no, I don't believe the Gore driven CO2 scare stories. I think CO2 is blamed since it's the by-product of all combustion so it's a proxy for saying "pollution" and "fossil fuel use is bad." Remember you basic science classes? How much research went into the facts that CO2 is an essential part of the eco-system? The Gore crowd hasn't made a case for reversing that.

There are also papers showing that various critters are expanding their rangers as it warms. Warmth isn't the limiting factor to species range, cold is. Check the Medieval Warm Period and note where they were growing crops (there's a reason it's called "Green"land.)

The Antartctic ice cap is getting thicker and the Arctic ice cap has put on a lot of ice since the 2007 low point. But you might want to check this paper on low ice: http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050... Note the remarks about radical climate changes.

Nasa has stated that the ice loss in the Arctic was due to clyclic weather conditions, not global warming.

As for acidification, well, there seems to be no there, there. Given that CO2 has been as high as 15-20x today's level, and life flourished, acidification seems to me to be just another Al Goreism. Note - I'm not saying anything here about pollution or other real issues.

"Action toward all of these issues is critical, but at this point I don't see that happening..."

I think some of the "actions" some people want to take are 180 degree ouit of phase with reality. In one of your articles you criticize Ms. Palin for suggesting that Mr. Obama should have boycotted Copenhagen. I agree with her. In my opinion Copenhagen was entirely for the benefit of carbon traders (you've read about the huge CT fraud in Europe?) and to provide third world dictators with huge slush funds for for whatever impoverishment projects (CastleBuilders R Us?) they had in mind.

Adaption to whatever climate change brings (warm or cold) would be a vastly more effective way to help people (and plants and critters) than would making the CT guys rich(er.) It would probably also push technology, which, as NASA has so amply demonstrated, is a good thing.

My point is that there ARE ways to help people that don't involve heavy handed measures that will drag/shove them further down. Let's get past the incredible greed and power lust of the Copenhagen crowd and, as you said, try to develop real solutions.

The CO2 story is a wild one indeed, with lots of complex variables to consider.

100-300 million years ago, when dinosaurs ruled the day, CO2 was 3-5 times current levels. It was 400-500 million years ago when the CO2 levels were at the 15-20x level you mention, and I doubt the plant and animal life resembled the world we live in today.

According to Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Pennsylvania State University:

"We know from looking at much older climate records that large and rapid increase in CO2 in the past, (about 55 million years ago) caused large extinction in bottom-dwelling ocean creatures, and dissolved a lot of shells as the ocean became acidic," he said. "We're heading in that direction now."

I'm not so sure we need a mass extinction of species at this point in time.

As to more recent history, over the last 2.1 million years peak CO2 levels have averaged only 280 parts per million. At today's CO2 level of about 385 parts per million, that's a 38% increase, with the vast majority coming from burning fossil fuels.

Will the earth survive increasing levels of CO2, of course, we're just not sure what sort of plant and animal mix will ultimately be here to enjoy it...maybe the dinosaurs will make a comeback!

Good post. As you say, there are a lot of issues far more important than climate change (which, let's face it, is really "global warming.") I like B. Lomberg's ideas on the subject.

I take an unpopular view - the global warming is a good thing, that is if we're really interested in improving the lost of people on this earth and are less interested in improving the bank accounts of carbon traders. Want to worry about something climate related? Worry about the next ice-age. It'll be far more devastating that any warming we're likely to have.

Increased CO2 (one of the bases for the entire eco-system) has been shown to greatly improve plant yields and water efficiency. History shows us that warmer climates are good for people, plants, and critters.

Lord Mockton states that food riots are occurring in various parts of the world due to farmlands being used for biofuels, not food. People are starving so that someone can profit from biofuels and carbon credits.

As far as population goes, note that societies with higher technology generally have cleaner air and much lower population growth (heck, Europe's is too low.)

You want to clean up the planet and help the poor and downtrodden? Kick out the dictators crushing these people and start getting some freedoms and technology into their hands (i'm not talking about computers here, either.) Start with agriculture and free market concepts.

As their incomes grow they will reach the point where there is less incentive for large families and the population issue will start to take care of itself.

Biodiversity? A warmer climate, more CO2, and basic technology in the hands of the people (human rights issue here) will put a lot less stress on biodiversity. Les of a population explosion and greater crop yeilds = less need to clearcut the amazon.

Fossil fuels are it for the forseeable future. Nuclear can be handled safely and take up a lot of slack, but it isn't going to happen in the near future. Neither will solar or wind. Soot and sulfur (etc) can be handled and CO2 is a good thing.

Human rights & Poverty? Primarily caused by dictators abusing their people. It won't be helped by more aid, the dictators will just claim their "fair share." Figure out how to get rid of the dictators and replace them with democratic systems and you'll improve the lots of these people. Get the Government out of the way and let these people start to build their economies. The results might surprise you.

So yeah, it's a hideously complex issue but, IMO, worrying about "climate change" is absolutely the wrong way to go.

You bring up a number of interesting points Greg. I do agree that dictators throughout the world are responsible for much pain and suffering, as well as preventing economies from reaching their full potential. Should the United States, through military action, remove those individuals? That's a tough topic for public debate.

As to climate change, the scientists who have spent the majority of their life studying nature, biology and climate would all disagree about higher levels of CO2 being good for humanity, as they see the destruction first hand via melting ice sheets, negative effects on animal species, and acidification of the planet's oceans.

The biggest issue for me stands out very clearly. Our oceans are being poisoned mainly by CO2. That is causing acidification that is killing the tiny molluscs etc at the very bottom of the food chain as well as the coral reefs. The obvious flow on effect of this is eventual extinction of marine life. Whales can live for around 200 years so this will not happen overnight but expect to see an exponential spiral in which marine life ceases to exist by say 2025-2030.

Speaking to more and more people who have spent time thinking and researching this and they all come to the same conclusion. We desperately need to start cutting back and the fastest 2 ways to do this are to stop dairy farming and non essential flying. These are "low hanging fruit" that can be cut out right now. Today. Immediate reduction of 30% of CO2 emmissions which would be a good start.

As you imply in your comment Michael, the oceans serve as a precursor for what may happen elsewhere on the planet due to increased levels of CO2. Unfortunately, the damage now occurring is hidden from sight and, therefore, not recognized by the general population for what it really is. One can only hope that society will wake up to what is going on, and do so soon.

Mark, it's good that you have thought about this. I have also planned to discuss that over at my blog. There's a lot for humanity to deal with and we can't only focus on one thing. A lot of these are intimately connected to each other, if not all, and just to focus on one is not only stupid it's a fail in progress. I know that we can discuss this over and over but we also need to make sure there will be action towards all these issues.
.-= Anders Sporring´s last blog ..Links for 2010-01-05 [del.icio.us] =-.

Action toward all of these issues is critical, but at this point I don't see that happening. One reason for creating the Global Patriot movement is to raise our consciousness to the point where we can work together, across borders and beliefs, to solve these problems.

Great list. I think basic access to enough clean water and the crisis listed as #12 is high on my list of critical issues.

The topic of water riots occurring in this decade is being discussed, as we will die within days without it, and shortages are starting to appear in developing cities.

Overpopulation. No doubts on that. All the other issues come from this one.

I will be covering this topic soon, as it's the most sensitive issue, and , as you say, may be the driving factor in many other issues.

Those are all big deals, and it will help to localize responses to things with such gravity.
.-= S.Smith´s last blog ..Kick Your Balance Woes =-.

Sorry, but nothing new to add. I agree that they are pretty much inseparable...and failing to recognise that has been instrumental in bringing us to this point. Without education we can't understand, without human rights, not everyone has access to education, without water people don't live long enough to study or get killed in the fighting over resources......actually, I change my mind, I think it's possible that over-population may underpin everything.

Thanks for the post!
.-= Alex Radway´s last blog ..A walk in the snow by Heather Smith =-.

The topic of overpopulation is significant, yet the most difficult to talk about do to ethnic, cultural, religious issues. Many feel we are at the limit of what the earth can handle already, but billions more will be added to the planet if changes are not made soon.

Fantastic list. I agree with Bethany...many of these challenges arose out of multiple, interrelated causes. The best solutions, too, will be multidimensional. As example, if you don't solve a human rights issue, while mitigating ecological challenges, you're definitely not perceiving the whole system or developing an optimal solution.

For my list, on the ecological side, which is inherently equitable too:

www.nature.com/news/specials/planetaryboundarie...

Thanks for the input Josh, and for the link to your list. I immediately noticed that ozone depletion and ocean acidification are two issues I could have put on to my list.

I think human rights which in turn will cover a lot of the other issues like: poverty, warfare, water crisis, etc.
.-= Bethany´s last blog ..Cream of Fennel Soup With Flaked Cod & Tarragon =-.

It's amazing, and quite sad, that it's taken so long for human rights to be addressed, and sadder still that we have such a long way to go in many parts of the world.