Did we already "break" the Earth ?

And time for another installment in the series "Common Sense, Uncommon Thinking".
This time it is about good news on the Climate Change front and it is that if you are "against fossil fuels" then celebrate because their days are without question numbered. The very definition of fossil fuels is that they are not renewable, they are finite, there is some quantity of them still left and nobody is making any more of them.
So the fossil fuels that exist today will be "brought up" and burned sooner or later. There is no doubt about that so why waste time focusing on it and focusing on what is fundamentally a "self-correcting problem". There may be debate over where they get burned and over what period of time but used up they will be. And then they will be done, for a few Millennia at least.
The relevant next question then is has the Earth already been "broken"? Has the planet already passed the point of no return and we are doomed to die a hot and wet death or is it likely that we have not "broken" this planet, that has been around for 7 Billion years, during the last 50 years?
Recent studies have shown that as CO2 concentrations increased so has the Earth's absorption of it. As we continue to burn up fossil fuels in the next couple of decades the CO2 levels are likely to increase further but will this be enough to bring about catastrophic 2nd level consequences (CO2 concentrations alone don't damage anything - if they cause temperatures to rise, that may cause other things and so on)? Nobody knows and I surely do not claim to know.
But is it likely that we have already damaged Earth beyond repair or that the Earth will not have a massive spasm from what transpired in the last 50 years? If you had to go with one of those which do you think is more likely.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Do we really "deserve to be happy"?

Happiness is not an evolutionary prerequisite. Nothing in the process of evolution selects for happiness (or lack thereof). Evolution cares about survival of the species and no advantages are conferred upon happy as opposed to less so individuals. The "happiness industry" which convinces people that they "deserve to be happy" and in fact makes them miserable because they are not as happy as they "deserve to be", is a recent phenomenon. When cave men brought home the antelope and everybody ate it around the fire, there was no cave man equivalent of Dr. Phil walking around trying to asses the degree of happiness of the group. In the Middle Ages, happiness was defined as not having the plague. It is only in recent times that the "entitlement of happiness" came about and as more of the basic needs were no longer an acute issue, mankind went searching for the next thing that will make them miserable. Total bliss or complete happiness is not a default
Read more

"Sex Addiction" - give me a break ...

I am getting a little bit tired of the whole "sex addiction" racket out there. Sex is not an addiction any more than skating backwards is. It may feel good to have air blowing up your behind (or to have sex) but that does not an addiction make. And if you feel you are addicted, just stop skating backwards! The problem is that calling it an "addiction" trivializes addictions which are real and substantive. The operative word being "substantive" meaning there is a substance involved (although this may not be the correct usage of the term substantive). With real addictions be it alcohol, drugs, nicotine or prescription drugs, there is always a substance at work which makes us feel a certain way ("good" or at least "better" than without it). From that emerges an addiction to that "feel good effect" and in that sense, yes, food can be an addiction also but sex cannot. Of course sex feels good, it is supposed to and without it feeli
Read more

Things we can do by ourselves, and things that we can't

Making a list (and not checking it twice) of things one can do by oneself and those which one can only do with somebody else. Please feel to contribute. Things one can do by oneself - read, run, swim, meditate, eat, hike, chop wood, ski, drink, dance, sleep, play chess, cook, sing, practice any number of sports, feel guilt (as opposed to shame). Things that can be done only with participation of at least one other person - hug, kiss, have a conversation, get or give a massage, shake hands, play any number of sports, entertain somebody else with one's dance, singingor writing, feel shame (as opposed to guilt).
Read more