Quote:
Originally Posted by fdpaq0580
Our difference, indeed, seems to be the time factor to eco-disaster for human kind. You seem to believe it is nothing to be concerned about. I think it is a problem that is already making itself known, and the sooner we begin to address it, the sooner we can correct it. Like a car accelerating downhill, the faster it goes, the more ground it will cover and it will take longer and be harder to stop. We are "oiloholics", and the first step is acknowledging that we have a problem.
If we don't begin soon, then I can imagine coastal cities where, instead of taxi's, people will get around in gondolas, like in Venice, Italy.
|
Here's the problem with that reasoning:
Even if there wasn't a single human, or cow fart on Earth, in 20-25,000 years all that "eco-disaster" flooding of coastal cities and global temperatures of 4-6 degrees higher would occur ANYWAY. It has happened dozens of times in the last 4 million years without any help from humanity, and it will happen again. The last time it happened was about 15,000 years ago----and the evidence is cities off the coast of India and Japan, and possibly in the Caribbean and Mediterranean that predate the start of the latest warming cycle and are now under 200 feet of water since they were built on the coastline of the time.
So, even given the chicken little scenarios, all we could do is reduce/eliminate human contribution (by living in the stone age) and everything they fear will HAPPEN ANYWAY. Now, if the great concern is that we accelerate the time frame so it happens in 15,000 years instead of 25,000, have at it. By all means spend 100 trillion dollars to "combat" it. Unfortunately, that would be a fool's errand. To those who think it will happen in 5, or 50, or even 500 years---get off Fantasy Island, that isn't even remotely close to reality.