UPDATE: According to the latest Rasmussen Poll, just 34% of voters believe that global warming is man-made, while 48% figure it to be planetary cycle. This is the exact opposite of a year ago where 47% said man-made and 33% said cyclical. Not sure what this is reflective of, since I think the mainstream news still predominately supposes man-made causation (as do our politicians according to the same poll), but it is interesting to track. Maybe it’s the cold weather in much of the country.
(HT: Powerline)
—-
There has been some good discussion going on in the comments on my original post (mostly by us authors), and so I wanted to direct attention to that. Though the original post dealt with my frustrations with “alarmists”, there was some added bits about Lomborg’s views on whether it is appropriate to try and “fix” global warming. This has led some of the comments and further discussion to drift towards global warming causation (CO₂ or Solar), and whether we should still try and fix something that’s cause is debated. In one of the comments Elijah said:
But if we have lessons to learn from Mars I don’t think that they are “don’t bother trying to deal with climate change.” ….. If there is anything we can do to off-set one day becoming like Mars (I’m not saying this is immanent), we ought to push for that for the sake of stewardship and the abilities that God has given us.
And this brought up something I find compelling about this whole issue of man-made versus nature. If indeed this is man-made and is caused by carbon dioxide, then I certainly think it is valid to pursue behavior that would try and slow things down or turn them around (though not gobs of money, as per the original post), but if this is a solar or natural change should we, or better yet can we, do anything? In all the graphs and models that Al Gore showed us we saw that we went from ice ages to warmer to colder and such over the millenia. No humans were around to cause or correct any of those changes, so I find it interesting, especially in a culture so predisposed to evolution, that we would be so bold as to say we should stop the warming (if in fact it is not man-made). I think this is one reason why people are very determined to find a human cause for this, because the alternative is out of our control and we have come to like our control.
And I think this is an interesting discussion because I do believe that more and more info is pointing to non man-made causes. I think we can squarely say that the term consensus is officially overused, and untrue. The debate is certainly not over, and I won’t make any grand statements, but interesting to discuss certainly…at least for people willing to discuss.
MARK ADDS: Pete’s link he added in previous comments is also here.
MARK ALSO ADDS (for Greg):
I think this is especially poignant in light of the series we’re (Mark, Pete, and myself) wrapping up at Grace Brethren regarding the “Gift of Limitations.” I am not stating that it is absolutely unreasonable to believe that the planet naturally undergoes climate change, in fact I certainly believe that’s the case, but I also find that there are a number of compelling arguments regarding human influence on global climate, and to flatly deny them is irresponsible itself. And either way, if we can invest in ways to better understand how we can healthily deal with climate change (man-made or not), why not?
I guess since I have no great admiration for capitalism/economics I am not especially sympathetic with the economic pressures of dealing or not dealing with the issues, but I understand that there are real issues regarding “priorities,” (and believe it or not I’ve been rather libertarian in my beliefs now and again, but that’s for another discussion). I basically am convinced that we need to do more to pursue better stewardship of our planet by God’s command.
Also, it would be nice if I wasn’t quoted out of context in a post again, wink.
ELIJAH ADDS: Also, Al Gore’s comments also presuppose a solar element with regard to terrestrial climate change. We don’t need to pick man or sun: it’s possible that we’re working together with the sun to screw things up.
Thanks Elijah. Sorry if I took you out of context, it was not intentional. You were saying (as I understood it) that even if Earth were like Mars we should try and do something about the situation. I was pointing out in this post that if this is natural and not man-made, then what CAN OR SHOULD we do about it?
I was not using your quote against you or your views at all, in fact you said it again in your comment here:
“And either way, if we can invest in ways to better understand how we can healthily deal with climate change (man-made or not), why not?”
Again, I am saying in the argument of climate change being natural – why are we trying to change it?
Sorry again, I will try not to use post comments in other posts to avoid this.
Mark,
This is another
emailcomment to you. I wasn’t offended by your quoting me; my wink was a playful comment.Anyway, I guess (like I’ve mentioned before) it’s like those P.O.S. asteroid films from last decade (like Deep Impact and Armageddon), where if we have the ability, why not do something about it? But we’ve not definitively proven that we have the ability and that is what we must address now. Maybe God gave us a certain degree of technology at this point in human history so that we can tackle these ebbs and flows (and maybe these ebbs and flows are signifying a corruption in the cosmos, like sickness and death—certainly we’d do what we could to heal someone who was experiencing a non-man-made ailment), though I don’t like to speculate about that too much.
But I have also had my naturalistic moments when I start believe what some scientists say regarding the potential benefits of a massive pandemic to cut down on overpopulation…
Good to know… I hate that subtlety is lost in text.
– And, I prefer Dante’s Inferno and Volcano. Much more realistic.
Hey Mark, I remember at some point you made reference to all of the money that gets made pedaling global warming- or did I imagine that?
Anyways, this is awesome:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/al_gore_caught_warming_globe_to
[…] that I am not fond of though, because of my skepticism of CO2 being a culprit of climate change (see this post). But my main contention with this post is just to point out that I find it revealing whenever […]
With Industrial Revolution Day tomorrow, this is an appropriate time to discuss this topic. Have we considered that global warming may be good for everyone?
Change isn’t bad, its just change. So what if Ecuador gets even hotter and Alaska becomes livable year round? There’s plenty of room, and we are mobile creatures, are we not?
From a stewardship point of view, is it more important to save the world from warming than it is to save humans from starving? Won’t global warming open up vast new tracts of arable land around the world to agriculture, and extend growing seasons in most of the rest of the world?
How about global prioritization? let’s all work to end hunger (by giving people jobs, not handouts) and we’ll deal with global warming in a few hundred years once it’s an imminent threat.
My personal opinion is that Global warming is a farce promoted by people who want to curb my liberty, and I refuse to accept it.
As Patrick Henry would have said, “Is Long Beach’s climate so sweet or the global status quo so dear as to be purchased at the price of chaining your thermostat to 78 in the summer and 62 in the winder and becoming a slave to those who would curb your freedom to drive a supercharged pickup truck with really good air conditioning? Forbid it Almight God! I know not what course others may take, but Give me Liberty or Give me Death!”
Ted, I had not considered that point, that’s very interesting. Your last paragraph is incredible- who is Patrick Henry?
Pete, I can only hope that is teacher sarcasm.
Oh, right.
[…] 2009 by Mark A recurring topic that I have brought up on CAI before regards global warming (see here, and here) and they way that it is presented in the media and culture. I most often feel that to […]