Comments, relating to the topic, are welcome, add a great deal to a blog, but must be in English, with no profanity, hate-filled insults, or links (unless pre-approved) To contact me with questions: rainnnn7@hotmail.com.




Saturday, October 26, 2024

What Does Adapt Mean?


 For the next blog, a natural seemed to follow immigration. People sometimes leave their homes because of climate change where they no longer can support themselves by work they have always done. There are reasons beyond climate change as in violence or lack of the income they could earn elsewhere; but we currently do see example of droughts that make it tough to grow crops even enough to feed the current population.

I began to research climate change a little differently than I had before when I knew I'd be writing about it. I have considered if, of course, when I was told by various groups that we'd all die if we didn't change our ways. The problem was when the Green New Deal was proposed by progressives that it had much to do with social change as much as climate change. It turned a lot of people off to listening to the ones proposing it, who were usually woke. How many know today what the Green New Deal even proposed? The following came from a source, where the link is below.

  • The Green New Deal wants to institute changes that would lead the U.S. to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and 100 percent renewable energy. 
  • To do this, the bill proposes investments specifically geared toward communities that have been impacted by climate change, as well as investments in renewable power, clean energy manufacturing, zero-emission transportation, and sustainable farming.
  • The bill also proposes broad infrastructure repair, affordable and energy-efficient power grids, ecosystem restoration, and hazardous waste clean-up.
  • The Green New Deal would instruct the U.S. to collaborate globally for a more cohesive approach to climate change.

 This was in: https://marketrealist.com/p/green-new-deal-summary/, which said it was estimated it would cost the US $93 trillion  Since this was proposed in the House and Senate, there has been a lot more coming out for what we need to do to avoid catastrophe in the United States and for the world. For instance, cattle are bad as they put out methane. Hence they should go and people need to be vegans, as cheese is also a no no.  

Of course, most of this won't happen first. It's a process that the climate people want to see gradually happen. For instance there was the Paris Accords, which have many bans on so-called developed countries that are not carried over to developing countries, which included China, close to being the dominant country in the world as it's growing.



NOW, here comes my take as an average person and not a scientist trained in climate (which is not weather). btw, these photos are all at Chaco Canyon twenty-five years ago. When we went there, it was claimed they were the Anasazi People. Today, as so often happens, they are called Ancestral or Ancient Pueblo People. It is believed that Chaco was a religious center for them.

To start on Climate Change,, I don't think that conservatives totally disagree that climate is changing. More, it's that it has been always changing from the time humans were developed enough to notice. I suppose there are some that don't believe climate is changing today, but they aren't paying attention to their own neighborhoods or the storms, which human are measuring and sometimes being devastated by. 

The question is how much difference can humans make to it, and what will a change do?  

At one time, humans (many today also) put all their faith in a god, their god to either destroy or save. Today, for many who don't count on a deity, they count on science and why not. Look what it's accomplished for the human population, at least the developed side. 


When it's suggested that coal, oil, gas, should be eliminated from use, it's not going after all the places they are used. It's developed countries. They don't want to get rid of all cars, just gas fueled ones-- except they then need electricity, in many areas where it's hard to get enough electricity for the homes it already serves, let alone if everyone gets an electric car. 

Can we depend on solar, when it only works with the sun? Or windmills when wind isn't extensive enough everywhere? There might yet be a new fuel for homes, vehicles, and don't forget planes, but it's not here right now.

This does not mean I am against doing what we can about CO2 and Methane, but it seems it is all I see discussed. There is a reason to be concerned given the example of many ancient civilizations. I have some links that those looking for more info on those and what went wrong. One of the theories was that they could not or would not adapt. Might we fall into that trap? 

Another question to go with that is-- could they adapt? When the Hittites based their early, very successful civilization on growing grains, maybe with a severe drought, such as they had, there was no other option for the large population. That happened to other cultures also as you will see in some of those links. So, adapting might mean leaving, but to where? Strangers aren't always welcome; and when they do get accepted, they can't always bring their culture with them.

The idea of an increasingly hot climate from global climate change is questioned in this link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13991003/Gulf-Stream-COLLAPSE-soon-scientists.html What if, due to ocean changes, we get a new ice age as the earth has experienced before?  If you haven't seen the sci-fi film, Day After Tomorrow, this might be a good time... or maybe not.

One of my concerns, which isn't being considered (from what I read) as much as changing the climate, is what do we do about areas that might be less livable with the change, like say oceans rising. It makes a lot of us wonder about the Obamas having a home on the ocean, two actually? Doesn't a rising ocean concern them or maybe they are on the ice age team?

 

Adaptation is about more than changing the climate (how would we change sun cycles, which may impact warming) beyond from a human angle, but instead figure out where can humans still live?

I know many very intelligent people are addressing these things; and for those worried, they are worth searching out for technical papers. For this essay, there are some simple links, which suits my simple thinking. I like to think-- what can we actually do as individuals; and I don't think, for most of us, buying an electric car, with a very expensive battery to replace and questions of getting electricity, isn't what we can do. We can though figure out if where we currently live will be negatively impacted when change happens. We can be sure we are keeping on hand supplies, just in case a big shift abruptly happens, as it seems it has in the past, which might involve new diseases. Be alert and aware.

Voting for those who have smart, realistic answers to our cultures might be a start. Head in the sand won't fix anything.

Sources:

  • https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=mnet&hsimp=yhs-001&type=type9049412-spa-3583-84499&param1=3583&param2=84499&p=which+cultures+were+destroyed+by+climate+change
  • On the Hittites, The Guardian. 8 February 2023. Retrieved 9 February 2023.
  •  https://climate.nasa.gov/news/1010/climate-change-and-the-rise-and-fall-of-civilizations/

4 comments:

Greybeard said...

Questions I never get answers to:
1. Looking at signs from the past, when has climate NOT changed?
2. China and India together have about 10X the U.S. population, and they burn fossil fuels and animal dung for heating and cooking. Until those two countries take this issue seriously, anything we do here is a drop of water in the ocean.
Virtue signalling frustrates me.

Rain Trueax said...

So true. It frustrates me too because mostly the ones pushing the Paris Accord or Green New Deal make no changes in their own use of fuel. Maybe they pay some carbon taxes, which just gives money to the government and for what use???

Darrell Michaels said...

Interesting post, Rain. I have always been of the mind that we all should be good stewards of the land, its resources, and the flora and fauna within it.

That said, I have yet to be convinced by evidence that climate change on a global basis is anthropogenicaly caused. As for the New Green Deal, it is nothing more than a leftist social agenda that does little to nothing to solve the problems that the proponents claim they care about.

And buying a environmentally unfriendly electrical vehicle to plug into a fossil fuel power grid is absurdity at its best. The mining for the rare earth minerals needed for electric cars, let alone the disposal of used batteries is horribly destructive to the environment.

I don't have all of the answers here, but the Green New Deal is not the answer to the problems. Greybeard makes excellent points accordingly.

Rain Trueax said...

thanks for commenting, Darrell. I also believe in caring for the environment and wildlife in responsible ways. Climate change is scary since we may be unable to do anything about it given historic examples. We are such a heavily populated world. How do we protect people in vulnerable places?