On attenuating pending climate change…

The exploration, examination, and exposure of underlying climate change factors and concerns are all good and well and I support and applaud the balance of them.

However, the fact remains that humanity it not paying attention. China and India are building and using more and more coal fired electricity generation plants – with no end, or even reduction, in sight. Nat.gas and oil exploration and acquisition is continuing apace if not faster. Green energy alternatives are barely getting by; sure they continue to expand, but at a comparatively slow rate.

At this point additional alarm raising appears futile. A more rational approach might be to accept 450+ ppm CO2, accept increasing climate change impact, and get on with dealing with what most assuredly will be, rather than what we might hope (but fail) to prevent.

Face it, for the next 100+ years the planet will enter and experience a vastly different climate than what humanity has enjoyed for the last 10,000+ years. Humanity is just too short sighted to look out 2-10 generations and try and fix a future world. Fixes in the past, FDA, EPA, toxic dumping, pollution, were all single generation fixes. Climate change is so large, extensive and drawn out that most humans cannot fathom a fix.

So, prepare for the inevitable. This train has left the station and will not be making stops for the next 100 years.


One response to “On attenuating pending climate change…

  • Anony Mole

    Chris Mooney, you realize that nothing you report on this topic will convince those not already convinced. The divide between the open minded and the closed minded grows daily and cannot be patched or bridged. For example:

    • Imagine a 70 year old man who smoked all his adult life, dying from lung cancer. Smoking didn’t kill him — an AGW denier would say, people die from lung cancer who never smoked a day in their life.
    • Imagine a 70 year old man who never exercised, ate high salt, high fat meals all his adult life, dying from arterialsclerosis. His lifestyle didn’t kill him — an AGW denier would say, people die from heart disease every day who had excellent exercise and eating habits.
    • Imagine a 70 year old obese man with diabetes. His poor diet won’t kill him — an AGW denier would say, people of all weights and diets get diabetes every day.
    And technically, the AGW deniers are correct.
    But probability arguments do not work on the closed mind. No amount of probability fact slinging will sway the argument.
    So, really, don’t bother; you’d be better off writing fiction.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: