Saturday, November 20, 2010

Climate Change: Conspiracy!

Climate Change: Conspiracy!

Being "green" is a tough gig. A lot of people telling you this and that and how you should behave. Argh. Add to this to a collection of non-scientists barking that science can be wrong. Well, it can be, sometimes.

Climate change is a body of science. Science evolves as new theory is developed. Sometimes science is wrong ( incorrect/poor science: science that has drawn conclusions or assumptions based on poor data or poorly designed experiments that includes invalid assumptions ) and this science evolves. Good science lives, bad science dies. Like evolution, science is the survival of the “repeatable”.

Science of complex systems ( the environment ), versus the science of simple systems ( the mechanics of a pendulum ), is a tricky subject. "Complex systems" is a "math" term. In a nutshell, it means a system that has "almost an infinite" number “factors” that attenuate the system as a whole (Climate Science).

Can you write down all the factors that impact our environment? I can't. But, we have to understand that in a body of science, such as Climate Change Science, some "parts" are easier to prove than others. This leads to the “wiggle room” that skeptics use to deny the body of science, sometimes as a whole.

The "honest approach" is to accept the good science and exclude that "bad science". Scientists use peer reviews for validation, meaning, anyone is allowed to disprove a scientific "element of the body of the science", provided they can demonstrate it is incorrect. Think of it like a big book. You can erase parts of it, but, you have to add to the body of science to do so: improve it. No "wiggle room" there.

So, why my title: Conspiracy? Well, a lot of people are concerned by Climate Change and I concur. The science of Climate Change is tricky, since, our climate changes naturally and is very very very complex ( the mathematical definition of complex ). Over millions of years, our climate changes. That is pretty well accepted by everyone. The rates at which these changes are occuring and changes in "known climate prediction" should be the focus, not the new record snow level in, say, Texas.

Okay, conspiracy. What if there was a bigger threat? A bigger threat to all life on this planet. I assert that there is a bigger threat. Yes we all know there are: asteroids, exploding stars, massive gamma radiation bursts, comets, George W. Bush, "atoms disintegrating to a lower energy existences", ergo, Grand Unified Theory, but I want to identify a threat that humans can control. It is the things we can control that matter. Corporations must first realize the reliability of the calculation of the future value of currency to "see the light".

I assert that toxic pollution is a greater threat to our environment than Climate Change.

Yes, I said it. Why? Because our planet, and its lifeforms have evolved to adapt to changing climate. Ice ages, asteroids, volcanoes: the earth has seen it, done it, been there. Climate Change may eliminate humans from the earth ( something up for debate ), but, Climate Change will not kill all life on earth. Earths' surviving “heebee jeebees” will simply continue to evolve. Mother nature does not care about anything ( what a "mean mommy", but, it is for "our" own benefit ). Migration patterns are already in flux, trees are even migrating ( can they move fast enough? ).

Focusing on toxic pollution: creating toxics, releasing toxics into our environment and throwing toxics into landfills, these are my concerns. Why? Because toxics can disrupt all lifeforms. Currently, our human race is being "attacked" by toxics that are usually not naturally occurring. Toxic impacts are currently feminizing many mammalian and other groups of species. More female fish, sperm counts of many male animals are dropping, these are two known examples.

Climate Change will pressure life on earth to evolve, but toxics “poison” or "change" most life forms natural processes, interrupting the natural selection of species, breaking mother natures rules. Did we beat the "system"? No. We are beating ourselves.

Think about it. If humans use less "toxic things" and our governments pass laws protecting all life forms from toxics, humanity would naturally use less energy ( making toxics, transporting toxics, hurting the environment by extracting materials, etc. to make toxics, cleaning up toxic pollution and the simple health impacts on us).

A very simple example: If we used farmed wood ( or other more-natural materials), instead of plastic, think of the all the benefits: healthier environment for all life and humans would use less energy. We just have to ensure that these farms are ethical too (invasive species, etc.).

The “beauty” of focusing on toxics, is that, we would use less energy to make products, thus decreasing CO2 emissions that are responsible, in part, for Climate Change Modulation.

Seems like everyone in arguing about CO2 for some reason. Perhaps to build the next "free market"?

Two birds with one stone? Perhaps. Think about it. Don't let governments escape the impacts of toxins on you and all the other “heebee jeebees” on our planet!


All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.