kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
The biggest problem I see with the whole Global Warming debate is that one side denies it exist while the other side portends doom and gloom.
I want a honest debate on the benefit/cost analysis. I mean more carbon and more warmth means more food for plant life and a longer growing season. With the exponential human population growth, it will alleviate some of the problems of food shortages. Sure some agricultural areas will not be as productive as before many other areas can be opened up for cultivation. Also it is harder for humans to die from heat than it is to die from freezing. There are many other potential benefits.
There are positive and negative consequences ... one issue with them is that we are not a single entity ... we have some 190 (give or take) nation states on the planet ... what benefits one might hurt another (and that tends to promote war) ... increased warmth is also more beneficial for disease and drought (as well as providing more energy for hurricanes/typhoons and other weather phenomenon) ... humanity will likely survive global warming (if it doesn't result in too many wars) but it is hard on animal and sea life ... also note that some of the mass extinction events have resulted from substantial changes in climate or oxygen levels
Ultimately the solution is not trying to manage greenhouse gases (I think that ship has already sailed) but to move into space ... while all of humanity resides on one planet we are ripe for extinction from any number of events ... if we are spread throughout the solar system then it would be virtually impossible to wipe all of humanity out ... if we care about our species at all we should devote most of the global resources towards space expansion