Today young people are “on strike” to prevent climate change. Good for them for caring about their future
and the future of the planet. But, let
me make a few observations and suggestions.
First, let’s not call it a protest against climate
change. Climate change is
inevitable. While we as humans do have
some effect on it, the world’s climate has changed before humans ever existed
and will continue to do so after we are long gone.
Second, what exactly are the protesters striking? These school students are “walking out
of class” in protest. Not much of a sacrifice when most of the
schools are giving them the day off in order to do so. Sounds like a great way to get out of school
for a day without any negative consequences.
How about if they protested after school when it might actually
interfere with something and they could show us that they themselves made a
sacrifice of some sort to protest because that issue is so important to them?
This is not a strike; it is a school sanctioned event. Yet rather than send students out into the
streets with placards of soundbites, teachers would do better to educate their
students about the complex facts, issues, and science that underlie the questions
and concerns about our climate and its inevitable change.
Subjects of discussion could include what we can do to
modify negative effects we may be having on the climate, ways to educate both
our and other countries about what effects their people and their way of life
are having on the environment, and, perhaps most importantly, how can we be
flexible and adapt to changing climates while maintaining certain aspects of
life that have become in effect essential in the twenty-first century.
Of course, this takes serious study, thought, and
open-minded discussion. It demands
movement beyond the politicization of the issue. Let’s
take for example renewable energy. Solar
panels sound terrific – free energy from the sun, no carbon footprint. But wait.
The same folks who are advocating for solar power are often also advocating
for animal rights and protections of endangered species. Solar collector fields disorient migrating birds
and, in many cases, essentially fry the birds until they fall dead from the
sky. Wind turbines also disrupt migratory
patterns.
Quick solutions may sound great, until one considers the
ramifications and intertwining aspects of life on this complex planet. There
are many things to consider, each on their own and then in combination with one
another. Is one willing to accept the possible
extinction of one or another bird species in order to have solar power? If not, then one must be willing to take the
time to discover ways to avoid the problem of frying those birds. In the meantime, one must consider what other
forms of energy one is willing to accept.
That means considering all energy sources and weighing one against the
other, including non-renewable and nuclear power as well as renewables.
Solar energy cannot effectively be stored, yet energy is
needed in this day and age when the sun is not shining. Are you willing to wait until morning to have
your emergency heart surgery because the solar powered hospital is not allowed
to use generators that do not run on renewable sources? Similarly, when non-renewables are banned,
one must consider the effect that will have on the world economy and on the
many individuals whose living depends on that industry in one form or another. The problems of climate change are far more
complex that simply banning plastic straws.
The quick solution sound bites allow the politicians to
virtue signal that they care about the planet more than their opponents do. But do they really? They
give the protesters something to put on their cardboard signs and to yell in
the streets. But beyond those sound bite
assertions, how much do the protesters really understand about climate change
and how much do they really care?
NBC has a web page that allows one to make “climate
confessions” about what they are doing or not doing to save the environment and
the planet.LINK (I would, as an aside, note that that the whole issue of climate
change is often conflated with pollution and environmental problems, all of
which are actually separate though related issues.) I
prepared six thoughtful responses to each of NBC’s six “confession” categories
(Plastic, Meat, Energy, Transportation, Paper, Food Waste;). When I went to input these responses, I
learned that one is limited to 130 characters including spaces. So much for my responses. Obviously, NBC doesn’t really want a
thoughtful dialog about environmental issues but rather is looking for sound
bites and a way to make people feel guilty for the simple and inevitable fact
of climate change.
“Confessions” under plastic have many people expressing their
guilt about the use of plastic straws and plastic bags. Banning
these will not save the environment. I’ve been using cloth bags for 40
years - so what? Plastic is not going away any time soon in any
really significant way. It’s just a great political talking point that
keeps us from addressing real problems.
The request for confessions
is nothing more than a way to create an undeserved guilt that can be used to
impose a variety of demands and requirements on people. The page has people seeking absolution for
things like sneaking a piece of chicken into their otherwise vegan diet or
reading a paper book rather than using their Kindle (never mind that using the e-book
would require energy; of course there is a separate category where they can
confess their energy sins). Let’s face
it, we are not going back to a horse and buggy and not everyone can ride a bike,
yet here are people confessing their necessary commute to work.
The comments also
include the virtue signalers, those who post comments to let us know that they
are superior to the guilty ones. They do
not use plastic straws, or do not eat meat, or use cloth not paper napkins, and
use public transportation. Yet, I wonder
how many of these, along with those who invented and encourage such confessions
like many of the climate protest activists and doomsayers, are fliting around
the globe in their high energy, high carbon footprint jets, drinking coffee using
Keurig cups, eating meals that rather than using locally sourced food use
energy to fly or truck in exotic and out of season fruits, vegetables, etc. We all live our lives, none are perfect, and
we all affect the environment in our own ways.
The mere
existence of the human race affects the environment and the climate, and we
cannot fully eliminate our contribution to climate change without first
eliminating the human race. And even
then, climate change itself would still occur.
The virtue signalers,
the ones who want to control your lives, have latched onto climate change as
another way to gain power and take control.
They will tell you what to eat, they will tell you what energy use is
good or bad and condemn you if you do not comply, they will make you
responsible for the climate and its change.
And in so doing they will make you a bad person, a person who needs them
to run your life for you.
The real inconvenient truth of climate change is that the subject
is far more complex than the media and sound-bite mentality and the Left would
make it. It is indeed something to be
concerned about, but instead of hysterically suggesting that the world will end
unless we all go back to living live cavemen, we would do better to learn about
the climate change phenomenon, its history as well as scientifically valid predictions
of its future. We would do better to
understand the many and intertwining ramifications of various human and non-human
activities and how these play into the ever-changing climate. We would then do better to understand what we
can and cannot live with and without, understand in what ways the climate is likely
to change, and then determine what alterations in our lives may be necessary
under that scenario – things like how to adjust to differing crop growth
patterns or alterations in some habitats, etc.
Hysteria is the tool of politicians; it is useful to them in their
quest for power. It does not solve
problems. But, if you are lost in your
hysteria rather than educating yourself about a problem, then you are more
likely to turn your power to solve that problem over to politicians who only
seek power over you, and who use climate hysteria as one of many ways to seize
it.
“There are no problems—only opportunities to be creative.” (Dorye
Roettger). Rather than wring our hands
that the world is ending and it is all our fault, we would do better to seize
the opportunity to find creative solutions to the inevitable changes in our
lives that the phenomenon of climate change will create. The need to look deeply and objectively at
the problem, without politicizing it, and to then work creatively within the
reality of its existence, will do far more than hysteria to create a better future
for our children and our world.
No comments:
Post a Comment