Well, I place value on rainforest, but there's a fundamental problem of denying to the Brazilians the same concept of "manifest destiny" that the US excercised during it early economic growth.
The best solution is to provide alternative economic activities for Brazilians so that they don't resort to slash and burn agriculture on inherently infertile ground.
Also, one other point that environmentalist fail to discuss is what they are willing to do if the science indicates that the earth is NATURALLY growing warming on its own and that nothing mankind can do in the area of pollution control is able to stop it.
As we know, the earth has gone through tremendous extremes of temperature throughout its history (without the assistance of mankind). In fact, less than 30,000 years ago we were in an ice age:
esd.ornl.gov
And if we look at the temperature ranges over the past 140,000 years, we can see that right after temperatures peaked, they dropped precipitously.
gcrio.ciesin.org
Some have associated this with the disruption of the "oceanic conveyor" which is a "river" of oceanic water, part of which consists of the Gulf Stream.
geo.wvu.edu
Now when this underwater current is disrupted, potentially by a sudden change in salinity levels near Greenland, which stops the descent of higher saline water to the ocean floor, we could see a drastic change in climate, because once that "river" stops flowing, the northern Atlantic, normally heated by the gulf stream, will see a sudden plunge in temperatures.
climateark.org
Ok... so now we know the risks, but we don't know if there we are avoiding the possibility that this is just a natural cycle that the earth goes through that we can't stop. And if that's the case, what can we do to mitigate the results of this warming trend?
For instance, could/should mankind deliberately attempt to influence the salinity of the northern waters by spreading ship loads of salt to maintain the descending columns of salty water?
Should we "fertilize" the ocean iron oxide particles to encourage algae "plumes" which would reduce CO2, as well as providing an incredible source of food for ocean life (increasing the bounty of marine wildlife).
s-t.com
iitap.iastate.edu
Or should we develop a means of artificially creating Smog in the stratosphere (since what we call smog is really ozone).
That's what people should be thinking about..
Because trying to halt the progress of mankind towards a better condition of existence is not a viable alternative.
Hawk |
