Climate and Warming Is Natural

Another in a not-so-regular series of posts highlighting nature's nature & 'ain't that odd'
Global Warming & Global Climate.
Climate and warming is natural. The planet has had many cycles and will continue to have many cycles of cold, hot, dry, wet, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, floods, fires, tsunamis, extinctions, extreme solar flairs, space debris collisions, animal creations and other natural ecological evolution.

Yes. Man has had a profound affect on this and the pace. So have other natural things and animals. But man has not solely caused the warming. Of course, Man should act responsibly and minimize his impact and do everything within his power to change his own behavior. But man should not necessarily interfere with nature by trying to save an endangered species, or tumble the cold ocean bottom water to the surface to increase nutrients at the surface, nor create an artificial atmosphere of CO2 on another planet so Man can easily live there, nor should we sequester carbon deep into the ground, nor should we place space mirrors -- we are not God nor should we be the masters of the environment, all things and nature.

The emotions run high on all of these topics, positions and attitudes. At the core of all of this is THE MAN -- it is all about THE MAN not the planet. If you read the core of sustainability definition from 1976 and since, it remains about THE MAN. It remains about saving us, not nature. We say save nature, stop the warming. But it is really about save nature to save Man. Except if we did not save Man nature would still be "saved".

Remember, the planet will keep on changing -- hotter, colder, wetter, dryer etc. The period it is in today is an extremely small nano-second whose current climate just so happens to be ideally suited to THE MAN's growth and evolution. It is a blip; it has not been this way for very long. Naturally, earth will change into a period of extreme hostility -- to THE MAN. But that is not a bad thing for nature, only us.

So ask yourself why sustainability definitions are human-centric and not necessarily good for animals, earth and nature. We define it in our terms. If we were not on this earth, would sustainability even exist? Sustainability of what -- ourselves of course.

The earth has been sustainably changing for 4.5 billion years.

Do the math. If we have existed say for 100,000 years and the earth is 4,500,000,000 years old, why should we try to "preserve" and freeze the earth and all its animals in the state as we know it today for such an infinitesimal blip? Why would this latter current period be "better" say than 1 billion years ago? It isn't nor should it be. It is not man-vs-nature, bad weather, and natural disasters (which are natural evolving events -- which may be "disasters" to THE MAN! but not nature). It is our planet growing and evolving -- naturally.

Like all creatures, we should evolve and live and die as nature continues. But of course, in "THE MAN-centric" definition and view of things, we won't.

So, please do not spout the polar bear is dying, or this natural thing is disappearing, or the sea level is rising. Come clean and tell it like it is. We use these emotional tags to cloak the true issue -- it is all about "THE MAN keeping things the way he wants them and wants to control them.

Go figure!

Good Night From Maine, USA