Finally, temperatures are back to normal — upper 70s, pleasant and slightly breezy. Of course it also probably means that very soon it will get hotter and hotter. And screams of global man-made warming will be back too.
I was quite entertained by the whole “unfair attacks, weather is not climate” screams coming after a number of people poked fun at global warming (well, now it’s “global climate change” as warming doesn’t sit well with public any more). I believe both sides have the right to a pay back. You brand every heat wave as “global warming”? You get “global cooling” for every instance of abnormally cold weather, and you don’t have the right to complain. Though given that global man-made warming is marked as less than 5F increase in average temperatures, the question is, why do we obsess over these future temperature increases while calmly ignoring pollution of “non-warming” kind?
Nature already had global warming, and on much higher scale (just ask geologists and biologists). I don’t think it’s important if the warming is caused by human activity or not. Just check what happened way back then, in previous eras.
While ecosystems were affected, nobody can give a clear answer as to how this current temperature change trend will affect current system. We believe it will be bad, but as soon as someone tries to ask concrete question in terms of “fine, predict what will happen to storm systems or how much more/less rain there will be or what kinds of birds will die” you get back a refrain of “weather is not climate, no data, can’t say”. Oookay…
Wouldn’t deforestation and, again, chemical pollution, along with general habitat destruction kills way more species that gradual warming did (or perhaps even will)? Nature itself doesn’t care much about polar bears, or humans or any particular kind of animal. Whatever organism is the most efficient to solve a task of surviving when it’s hotter, it will win.
What about the problem of raising ocean levels? Fantastic, perhaps that will make people not build within 20 feet of the ocean. Can there be a financial estimation, on how much it would cost not to allow new build-outs in low-lying areas and areas, prone to flooding? Would it cost more than trying to cut down on just the CO2 emissions? Will water level raise in next 30 years by significant amount and can we have a gauge to see if prediction comes true?
And if not… well… Do you really think that people without extra disposable income will behave in more “ecologically sensitive” way? I kinda doubt it. If you don’t have money for gas heater, you will burn old phone books. When extra 20 bucks a month means you have to cut grocery budget, chances of switching to more ecologically friendly energy provider are minimal. Faced with threat of survival on local scale, global problems usually go on a back-burner. And getting everyone to agree on something that kinda sorta should be good in the future in “if we didn’t screw up the model too much” way is very-very difficult.
So… For those who worry about global man-made warming I say think of what will happen if Sun will warm the Earth by those 5F. And see how the end result will affect humanity and prepare for it.
For everyone else — enjoy nice warm weather, and don’t forget to visit the Wild Flower center — flowers are about to go wild, like most of Texas nature does in Spring.