Studying, Ending, Humanity.

Weir, Dyke, Prognostic, Apotheosis, Effulgence, Bosky, Apocryphal, Spurious, Prodigious, Garret, cum grano salis, Sorrel, Perforce, Gimlet, Vim, Bugger.

Something to Live for,
Something to Die for,
Living to Die,
Dying to Live.

This week on a Stray World:

• Global Warming/Reset the World?

Global Warming/Reset the World?
I caught a snippet of the naysayers in The Star over the week. The discussion was centred on global warming, or rather, the lack thereof.

I should probably add the total number of naysayers were ten divided by ten strong, and the reply one hundred minus ninety-nine in amount.

Basically, the gist of the letter quoted a few facts and figures which apparently support the idea global warming is a myth. Where the rising temperature is actually a natural progression of natural climate change by Mother Nature.

Here's a low down on what the naysayers say about global warming:

• An increase of 1 degree Fahrenheit over two decades is irrelevant because the measurements were taken from local micro-habitats which have undergone severe changes over the years;
• What the greenhouse gas producing countries spew out from their industries is nothing compared to what Mother Nature expels from her gut, e.g., volcanoes, decaying vegetation, etc.
• Global warming is actually delaying the next ice-age;
• Carbon trading schemes are essentially useless due to governments setting lax carbon-emission targets;
  
• With several million members worldwide, the 'greens' or environmentalists are an industry upon itself bent on profit,
• Environmental movements are hampering human right efforts worldwide by emphasising on the protection of the environment above all else.

It must be made clear, first of all, global warming is a science, not a fundamentalist struggle by environmentalists. Decades ago, during a period in the middle of the 20th century, a cold spell led many to believe the next ice age was upon us. Today, probably the very same climatologists are vouching for global warming.

While this may seem contradictory at first, we must remember the application of scientific methods is important in any scientific study.

To quote Gil Grissom from an episode of CSI: "When the evidence changes, so must the theory."

New studies and surveys of ice cores throughout the world have revealed several periods of warmth and cold throughout Earth's history. Cold periods are known as glacial periods, separated by warm, temperate interglacial periods.

This would then explain the up and down patterns of the Earth's climate during the past centuries.

Here is where it gets weird.

There is a Great Ocean Conveyor underneath the choppy waters surrounding the continents. Without making things too complicated, imagine a snaking line of hot water flowing from the equator to the poles, where they are cooled and sent back to the equatorial regions.

Science 101: Hot water is less dense than cold water. Hot water will therefore travel all the way up North before sinking to the bottom as it cools. Cooler water returns to the equatorial regions, completing the cycle.

That is why Berlin isn't as cold as Edmonton, even though they are located on the same altitude.

Global warming isn't so much the illness as the catalyst for an eventual ice-age. As the seas warm up, the polar ice caps begin to shrink. Shrinking ice caps don't just raise the sea level, they reduce the concentration of salt within the worlds' oceans. This is because most of the water trapped in the polar ice is freshwater.

Reducing the salinity of the seas means cold water becomes less dense than it should be. If cold water can't sink to the bottom of the oceans, the Great Ocean Conveyor comes to a standstill.

The result, instant ice age for the Northern Hemisphere.

Of course, this is all just theoretical. Nothing in science is absolute.

But it doesn't stop me from hoping a great tragedy like that will occur. Imagine a poor, derelict, starving Europe and America, and the rise of a powerful block of warm-climate agrarian countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa.

As depressed as I am about life, I would live to see that.

To answer the point raised where Mother Nature spew out more trash than all of humanity combined in a year, first we have to put things in perspective.

As usual a reminder, global warming as a science involves the study of various disciplines combined, and any individual component shouldn't be taken out of context.

It is irrefutable that volcanoes produce an amount of toxic gases greater than humans do every year. Additionally, industrial nations have cleaned up their practises and procedures over the decades.

However, one may be urged to forget the wholesale cutting of rainforests, highlands and other carbon absorbing structures on this planet. While industry practises may become cleaner, you can't expect Mother Nature to become more efficient by growing faster can you?

While plants may grow faster with increasing levels of carbon dioxide and warmer weather, as more forests are being levelled than being replanted, the efficiency of each plant in processing carbon dioxide must increase to make up for their fallen members.

To put it in perspective, Naruto using kage bunshin no jutsu to fight Orochimaru during the first season before the episode fillers.

In essence, Mother Nature may spew out more stuff than us, but unless we can eat our own vomit like her, humans become net contributor to greenhouse gases, however insignificant certain factions may describe it.

Criticism on the carbon trading scheme is valid.

Here's a run-down on carbon trading using suicide-bombers as a metaphor.

Imagine two Al-Qaeda cells with suicide bombers. Cell A contains 100 suicide bombers while Cell B contains 2 suicide bombers.

Due to management crisis as a result of multiple assassination and arrests of senior Al-Qaeda members, the number of suicide bombers in each cell must be capped so more can live on to take up administrative positions.

Let's say Osama only wants 50 suicide bombers in each cell, and Cell A needs all its suicide bombers to carry out bombing operations as it operates in a particularly busy Baghdad street; Cell A will either reduce the number of suicide bombers or, purchase the free membership for suicide bombers in cell B.

This means Cell A includes Cell B's quota in its numbers, with an extra two men.

If Osama states penalties for every man that exceeds the quota, Cell A will only need to pay for the two extra men.

Substitute the industrialised West for Al-Qaeda Cell A, the undeveloped third world countries for Al-Qaeda Cell B and carbon emissions for suicide bombers and that's carbon trading in a nutshell.

As the demand for carbon emission allowance increases from the developed nations, carbon credits (allowances for carbon emissions) increase in value, resulting in a very lucrative industry for all.

Smart, ingenious. Doomed to fail.

Even though carbon trading is supported by the EU, non-signatories of the Kyoto protocol such as the USA and China, who are the top two carbon emitting countries of the world, do not engage in carbon trading as actively as they do in Internet pornography.

Critics also point out local governments often set carbon-emission targets that are higher than what would be considered prudent and effective. This has resulted, not surprisingly in an increase of carbon emissions from countries who have delivered their John Hancock's to Kyoto such as Ireland.

Next point of contention in the global warming debate, environmentalists are nothing but imperial capitalists exercising every available measure to ensure undeveloped nations and communities stay undeveloped and poor.

Apparently, this is the reason various organisations wish to preserve local culture, to keep the black man in Africa and the Asians in their jungles.

Without rapid development (i.e. deforestation for industrial purposes) these countries will never compete on a level playing field with the heavily industrialised countries who can now supposedly, afford to reforest their raped lands.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but isn't America, THE most developed country actively implementing deplorable environmental policies?

Oil-fields in the Alaskan wilderness and overfishing of commercial fish-stocks aren't the standard practise for rehabilitating the environment.

Here, the critics are as naive as the environmentalists who believe the masses will come to accept the extinction of a species as a greater crime than murder.

Besides, there is an Asian country which has proven beyond a doubt it is possible to be an industrialised developed nation in harmony with traditional cultures and nature: Japan.

The country boasts the second largest economy after the US (developed), boasts master sword makers who still craft swords for a living (culture), and boasts an astounding 68.2% forest cover (environment).

I am all for shutting down their whaling fleets but you can't deny they still have a higer percentage of forest cover than Malaysia!

If they can do it, I fail to see why the rest of Asia and the world can't. Maybe we are just so lazy, we would rather swim in our own muck than clean up.

As usual, treat all this info with cum grano salis, as evidence continues to pour in regarding the effects of global warming will (not may) change facts into myth.