Recently watched a documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" that admits global warming as true, but disagree that it is man-made and/or CO2 caused. I think these few arguments, if correct, are significant:
1. CO2 produced by human is < 1%, while the main contributor is the ocean.
2. CO2 levels correlate with global temperature over millions of years, but lagging behind by few hundreds years, which implies that CO2 level is the affected by global temperature.
3. This is the most important but non-scientific reason: it has become politically correct not to go against the claim that Global warming is caused by man-made CO2.
[However, I should also point out that the producer may not be that trustworthy after checking him out on the wikipedia.]
In buddhism, there is this concept of wu-chang, meaning non-constant, or ever changing. To me, constant or without change is as if dead. Even our body temperature fluctuates. How would one expects global temperature to be constant? Thus, global warming is probably just as natural a phenomenon as the 4 seasons in a year, but not a problem to be prevented.
Another article I read suggested that as the river water level rises as the ice on top of high moutains melts, it will affect the communities residing in the vicinity, and cost them their land and homes. The time frame was reported as a "short" 40 years. It seems to me that human communities are assumed to be stupid to remain there for 40 years waiting to be drowned. It seems to say that human "owns" the land and therefore nature is wrong to take their "possessions" from them.
Nevertheless, I am not suggesting that we ignore all the good recommendation to reduce pollution, conserve resources, and etc. However, we should not go to the extreme to deny the poor africans and yet to developed regions to use electricity, and therefore cannot develop and remain having poor quality of life.
No comments:
Post a Comment