Here are some new stories you probably won't be reading in the NZ Herald.
Switzerland's glaciers are melting and the pace is accelerating. Estimated at having lost 13% of their total mass of ice in the past 9 years, it's estimated that in about 100 years even the largest of them will be gone with the smaller ones disappearing long before then.
As our own government appears to be seeking ways to let the coal burn free, scientists are warning if we are to have any hope of reducing carbon emissions, we can't start using coal to make liquid fuels to replace oil.
The classic stages of resistance to change, as summarised by Mahatma Ghandi, appear to be happening: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
We are well past the ignoring phase. That stopped in the 1990s. The laughing is still heard in some quarters, like the National Party caucus room and the editorial offices of the NZ Herald, but most others appear to be losing their smirks as the ice keeps melting.
We now appear to be on to the fighting part, as vested interests have mislead the public to win office to secure a denialist agenda - as exemplified by Gerry Brownlee, Rodney Hide and more arrogant, ignorant others.
I don't really enjoy using these 'terms of endearment' for people who can't see the evidence for what it is. But restating the evidence doesn't help. That has been done over and over and over. Brownlee and Hide don't give a rat's arse what the evidence is.
Meanwhile, the climate doesn't give a rat's arse what they think...and the ice keeps melting.
I keep referring to the ice because it looks more and more like this mass of 'stored coolness' is the only thing blurring the edges on a shift in climate that could be dramatic and swift were it not for the moderating effects of water - frozen and not.
The fight will in the end be an unfair one. The climate will win. There is no doubt about that. The sad thing about it is that when it does, the denialist fools who doomed our children (not just theirs) to that fate will probably have died fat and happy.
Our short life spans keep large numbers of us from understanding many cycles or things that last longer than we do....and we are too often like May flies, living our glorious, self-centred, metaphorical 'day' amidst centenarian Galapagos tortoises - long, slow processes - thinking them to be rocks if we are aware of them at all.
I'm a skeptic, not a denier.
ReplyDeleteI'm skeptical about the human impact, not whether the climate is changing.
Posting a few links to some articles showing the climate is changing, doesn't prove we should have an Emmissions Trading Scheme.
petermcc: The one thing no one argues with is that the huge and continuing increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is caused by human activity. The effect of that CO2 is measurable and has been shown to be causing a rise in global temperatures.
ReplyDeleteClimate change is, therefore, being driven by human activity. If you mean the scale of the impact, there is reason for concern. The evidence suggest climate change can be dramatically fast once a tipping point is reached. Of course once it is reached, it's too late.
I wish skeptics advocated prudent caution and questioned the status quo as well any changes to it.
here is more than enough evidence the way we run the world today is not sustainable.