RE: [Paddlewise] Global Warming: Fact or Unproven Theory?

I must apologize in advance, since I cannot now, nor ever will be able to 
keep from carrying on debate about climate change issues. I also think that 
climate change is very relevant to paddlewise, since sea kayakers will be 
significantly impacted by its effects (sea level rise, ecosytem collapse, 
more extreme weather, etc).

At 11:00 AM 12/12/00 -0800, Peter A. Chopelas wrote:
><snip>
>The problem is we are ignorant on all of the forces that control weather:
>few of the process are known or understood with certainty and the earth
>itself (even it could be understood) is not a closed system.  With all of
>the weather stations, computers and satellites we can not see into future
>more than about three days, and we do not have reliable weather data for
>most of the country further back than about 100 years, and certainly none
>of it without any detail.

Predicting weather changes on a local scale (in both time and space) and 
predicting whether global warming will occur are totally different animals. 
You are comparing apples and oranges. Weather is a chaotic process that by 
definition is unpredictable without 100% perfect input data. Global warming 
due to the greenhouse effect is not a chaotic process. We know exactly how 
much CO2 is being put into the atmosphere, and we know exactly how much 
sunlight hits the earth. It is easy to calculate, using a simple energy 
balance model, how much the Earth will warm in a 100 years. Undergrads do 
this regularly in class.

Now, the trick is to understand exactly what global warming will do to 
weather. That is the million dollar question that everyone wants to know. 
Common wisdom suggests that extreme weather events will increase because a 
warmer atmosphere has more energy for storms. Scientific research on this 
is in its infancy right now, and there is no consensus on whether this is 
true or to what extent it may occur. One things that is certain, is that 
weather patterns will probably change somewhat or even dramatically. This 
is actually a big deal, since 6 billion people on Earth have pushed the 
carrying capacity of the land to the max. Climate change will cause 
ecosystems to slow down productivity as they readjust to new weather 
patterns, which will probably cause famine and drought for many years. 
Whether this happens in 10 years, 50 years, or 100 years is a major thrust 
of current research. The US just released their first ever assessment of 
the impacts of climate change on agriculture, human health, and ecosystems 
last month. This report is based on many regional scale models driven by 
global scale models. The report is conservative in saying that short term 
impacts to the US will be minor. Unfortunately, long term impacts are 
worse, but it is hard to think 100 years in the future. Unfortunately, the 
120 year atmosheric residence time of CO2 requires that we think about the 
impacts of our actions on four or five generations into the future. Who 
among us does this on a regular basis?


>To be able to predict 1000 year, or even 100 year, trends based on this is
>totally laughable.  Everytime someone tried to take rational theories and
>applied it to known weather patterns they found none of the predictions
>even close.  For example someone took the greenhouse gas/global warming
>model back to the year 1900, the year most would agree was the initiation
>of widespread fossil fuel consumption, the model ended up showing that
>something like 90 percent of our atmosphere should be CO2 by Y2K.  Clearly
>there are other forces at work that are not understood.

To take one example of a model that didn't work and then claim that all 
models don't work is fallacious. Why not take the Intergovernmental Panel 
on Climate Change's (IPCC) assessment of *all* climate models, and use 
their results? They look at them all, and decide on the consensus result, 
which is that we can expect 8-10 degrees C warming by 2100. That is a 
staggering number for anyone who understands the scale of climate change.


>There may indeed be evidence of global warming but the hard science that
>can predict the future of it, and the cause of it, are totally absent.

This is not true. The science that predicts the future and cause of it are 
there. Have you ever heard of the IPCC?
It is made of up of hundreds of the world's leading climate change 
scientists who review *all* of the climate change related literature and 
distill the facts from that as best they can. Truly, there is no example of 
better science being conducted since the heyday of quantum mechanics in the 
1930's.

>So
>everyone is engaging in speculation (and most of it not scientific) at this
>point.  Personally I would suspect that IF global warming is a real long
>term trend, THEN we as humans are likely unable to do anything about it,
>nor are we to blame.

According to the IPCC, humans are *definitely* to blame. The emission of 
greenhouse gases is the primary cause. CO2 accounts for about half of all 
warming.


>We know that vast swings in global climate has been
>the history of this plant, and humans had nothing to do with it.  Why
>should we think the future will be anything different?  So if this is a
>real trend, not just a short term anomaly, than there is likely nothing we
>can do about it.

Yes there is something we can do about it.... stop emitting greenhouse 
gases. Viable alternatives exist, but we are complacent and unwilling to 
develop them in the absence of a crisis. We are lulled to sleep by the 
songs of fossil fuel interests who tell us that our economy will go 
bankrupt if we try to something global warming. On the contrary, our 
economy will benefit more than we can possibly imagine if we get serious 
about stopping global warming. This may sound like raving, but I can defend 
that statement adequately in another post if anyone cares. The most 
expensive thing we can do is to do nothing about climate change.


>And even if it was possible to prove there is measurable contribution from
>human activities, which we can not at this point, I would say that the
>contribution due to people going kayaking is totally insignificant.  You
>will not make any changes what so ever even if you completely stop going.

This is also false. Every time someone drives their car, then that person 
contributes to global warming in a significant way. If you total up all of 
the CO2 emissions from American personal automobiles (no semi-trucks, 
planes, trains, etc...), then that total is greater than the emissions of 
every other country in the world except for China and Russia. The sum total 
of each individual who drives is staggering, don't you think? If you buy a 
more fuel efficient car, or choose not to use your car, or even carpool 
religiously, then you can help prevent global warming as an individual. 
You'll be a lot happier when the gas crisis hits again this summer harder 
than ever.

But to browbeat kayakers as causing global warming as a group is 
ridiculous. But since most kayakers drive cars, then we are indirectly 
responsible. Since global affects kayakers directly due to changes in the 
hydrologic cycle from climate change, then we should care about it and do 
our parts.
<snip>

>The fact of the matter is that larger and larger numbers of people go out
>into the wilderness every year and there is no practical way to stop it.  I
>would offer that these wilderness areas are far better off if we encourage
>human powered wilderness activities instead of jet skis, snow mobiles,
>4x4s, etc.  So all of us should encourage human powered transport, and all
>of the benefits of it, as much as possible, and as responsibly as possible,
>and not quibble over things we have no control over.  The more responsable
>paddlers there are out there, instructing, teaching, or just be a good
>example for the rest of us, the better off we are.

I couldn't agree with you more. Very well stated, however I think it is 
wrong to also dismiss global warming as an issue that shouldn't be included 
in your idea about instructing others on how to live responsibly.

Cheers,
kevin

Kevin Whilden
Your Planet Earth
http://www.yourplanetearth.org
(206) 788-0281 (ph)
(206) 788-0284 (f)


***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************