Climate Change Versus Global Warming

So, I realized, today, just how much I really hope my mother’s belief in religion has some basis in  fact. I really don’t know whether it does or not. All I know is that no one knows.

Where do I go with that?

Even Christ didn’t claim to know. He pointed out that everything came down to a matter of faith. Well, I suppose many would dispute whether Christ claimed not to know or not. He did point out that it all came down to faith, though.

That no one knows what follows death, if anything, follows from what I have always believed: that logic rules. But logic fails to throw light on this topic. At lEast I do not see how.
So here I am, with nothing to fall back on.

What a nightmare!

Yet I remain a hopeless–romantic even–optimist. I can only ascribe credit to faith. Or, perhaps, I  can only assume faith must be there to nourish the irrational hope that humanity might be able to survive global warming. Make no mistake about it, the future of life on this planet is threatened here. Not just human life, but all life

The logic of the threat far outstrips petty bickering amongst deniers and believers. This has been obvious since Charles Keeliing first discovered the problem in Earth’s atmosphere of excesses in greenhouse gasses, a problem that was only growing, in the 1950s. Now the scientific community has gone silent, even though there are thousands of scientists who would deny that. Today, it is virtually impossible to be published if you mention uninhabitabliity of the planet as a potential consequence of global warming.

Yet it is clearly a potential risk. Always has been. I am a mathematician, not an expert on any of the numerous fields associated with climate change. As a mathematician, the importance of an excess in greenhouse gasses can’t be denied. The danger of the potential of runaway global warming is apparent and uninhabitability is the inevitable result if that happens. Think Venus, here

“Climate change.” Now there is a perfect example of how the discussion has evolved. Everyone knows the term.. Most of us now acknowledge that it is real and happening, although a few vehemenently deny it is man caused. As if that matters. What matters is whether we can do anything about it. But the term, “climate change” shows a big part of the problem. The climate has nothing to do with the danger. What the danger is is global.

If the globe gets too hot, the planet will not harbor life any more. Who cares what caused it? The problem is not “climate change” it is “global warming.” But “climate change” is so much easier  to speak of. For one thing, panic ceases to be a concern. Unfortunately. the use of this term does nothing to help us address the problem. It probably hurts, in fact. For another, scientists don’t know what can be done, yet, to address global warming, which can usually be dodged so long as the topic is “climate change.” Hiding behind the terminology, though, is just cowardly.

Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Climate Change Versus Global Warming

  1. Hank Raymond says:

    You can say, “Global warming is causing climate change. That would be accurate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *