This is what I love about these debates. There's good data on both sides. If one process such as solar cycles are pushing us toward an ice age and another process such as global warming from GHGs is pushing us towards a hot period, then will they counteract each other? We're going to find out for sure in our life times.
Two things I've always wondered, though, are these.
1) Are our Earth's natural processes capable of absorbing all the fossil fuels being burned into the atmosphere and recycling them?
2) And if so, is it possible to burn so much fossil fuel that it pushes the Earth's natural processes beyond a point, which is habitable for humans?
My own hypothesis is as follows.
1) In answer to the first question, I believe that all the fossil fuels in the earth could be burned and the Earth will eventually recover. After all, they got into the earth in the first place through natural processing. So the Earth is capable of self-healing, even in extremes. Humans haven't been around long enough to see true extremes in Earth natural processes.
2) In answer to the second question, I believe that the Earth's range of climate can be very extreme on either end, hot or cool. I also believe that there is a relatively narrow band within which humans can survive. Consequently, I believe that it is indeed possible for humans to push the Earth's natural processes so far to either extreme as to make the Earth inhabitable for humans. The Earth and life will go on, but maybe without us.
These are ultimately testable hypotheses. As the science improves, we'll be able to test these theories. Hopefully, the science improves fast enough that we can adjust our behavior before it's too late. Either way, I'll be dead before any of this becomes an existential issue for humans. However, you'd think a little prudence would be in order given the possibility, even if perceived to be slight, that we may push ourselves to extinction. Just my honest opinion. |
