On a planet in an obscure solar system of the Milky Way galaxy I sit in a small office of an old building at the following latitude-longitude: 41.74179,-111.812636. This means that for 3 out of 12 months I experience freezing to near freezing temperatures. For 4 to 5 months I experience cold temperatures, and if I wish to grow a garden or begin farming I can be limited to a 3 to 4 month season. Huddled in my office reading Hyperwarming climate could turn Earth's poles green, I’m besieged by a voluminous cloud of particles just outside my window that are barely moving fast enough to register 31 F (-0.5 C) on a thermometer. A light snow, and at times freezing rain, slowly covers the ground, the trees, the grass, and furry woodland creatures. As I sit 4,500 feet above sea level I ask myself, “Am I worried about global warming?”
According to the article, as global warming continues, the effects could result in positive feedback loops that cause temperatures to rise even higher than expected. One of these problems, “hyper-warming”, is caused when sea levels rise and cover larger portions of the continents. With more area covered by water, temperatures rise. Researchers have predicted that if warming continues, global temperatures could return to levels not seen since the Eocene era. For those unfamiliar with the Eocene era, as I was, this means a stable tropical climate, forests and a plethora of species thriving even in polar regions, and possibly even new species of whales. These heinous conditions lasted for approximately 22 million years.
In all seriousness, I am puzzled by the intentions of the article’s author and the scientists interviewed. Can it be true that they want to stop global warming from happening?! The policy of preventing the world from spiraling into a state of paradise seems to be based on the gloomy predictions of “scientific” prognosticators. However, all of the historical-scientific evidence points to a fabulous future if the globe can attain Eocene conditions once again. Using the ingenious human mind and our advances in science, we can find a way to restore the earth’s paradisiacal status if we can only eliminate the attitudes that hold us back. Considering the snowball alternative, I vote “nay” for stopping global warming.
I think the problem lies not in the future earth and species, but in what we currently know and hold to be true. Many societies would be completely and totally uprooted, since they are coastal, and would probably end up underwater.
ReplyDeleteThere would probably be a huge population collapse as storm become more and more violent, and more people are left without homes to return to after hurricanes, tornadoes, and torrential rains.
I think the issue is that as temperatures increase faster (due to CO2 and CH4 outputs, even faster than when the earth warmed up in transition from the paleocene), global moisture patterns will become more extreme: Places that are dry may get drier. Places that are wet may get wetter. This may drastically reduce the amount of land on which we can farm, live, etc.
I'm all for global tropical paradise, but I'm not all for being the source of the global change. That said, I do think this is an interesting take on the subject, and not one often talked about.