See For Yourself, While You Still Can

        Having recently returned from Glacier National Park (an incredibly beautiful place one should see while it’s still “glaciated”) I have been reflecting on some of the more ludicrous statements on climate change I have heard or read in recent days. 

        Glacier National Park’s ice formations have been around for more than 7,000 years and have survived warmer and cooler periods. But they have been shrinking rapidly since the late 1800s, when North America emerged from the “Little Ice Age,” a period of regionally colder, snowier weather that lasted for roughly 400 years. This time frame coincides with an exponential increase in industrialization and the attendant use of fossil fuels to power it. At its founding in 1910, the park had at least 150 glaciers, most of which are now gone, having become so shrunken that they are no longer considered glaciers. Even under natural conditions, these small, vulnerable mountain glaciers would have lost ground over the past 50 years — but they would have eventually stabilized at a reduced size. Instead, the park is on track to lose its glaciers within a generation.

        Unless one is willing to consider those portions of Montana and southern Canada which include the park as thermally isolated from the rest of the world and a completely unique microclimate, which of course they are not, then statements such as “I don’t believe in climate change/global warming” are simply insane. In any rational analysis the loss of glaciation over the last 80 years or so is absolute proof of the general warming trend which science confirms is real and present. Note: I didn’t say what may or may not cause it, just talking about climate change.

         I understand that there are those who are unwilling to attribute to humans any shared responsibility for the acceleration of climate change. I believe that these folks fall into two categories. The first is the group who, for primarily economic reasons, are unwilling to consider, even in the face of overwhelming scientific consensus, that the actions of humans are accelerating the process, since doing so would open the door to changing some things we do, which might cost money. More to the point, it would be detrimental to the balance sheets of some sectors’ large corporations, especially those which are energy related. As proof of this I offer the suppressed Exxon Mobil in-house memos to that effect: “Although appreciable amounts of carbon dioxide have undoubtedly been added from soils by tilling of land, apparently a much greater amount has resulted from the combustion of fossil fuels”–indicating company scientists understood the link between fossil fuel use and rising CO2.(1957) and, later:  "Among the possible sources of rising CO2 in the atmosphere, “none seems to fit the presently observed situation as well as the fossil fuel emanation theory.” (1968)  Finally and unbelievably, in 1982:  “The consensus is that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial revolution value would result in an average global temperature rise of (3.0 ± 1.5)°C [equal to 5.4 ± 1.7°F]…There is unanimous agreement in the scientific community that a temperature increase of this magnitude would bring about significant changes in the earth’s climate, including rainfall distribution and alterations in the biosphere.” 

        Wanna know what's weird about those statements? Ever since, Exxon Mobil has suppressed these memos, only recently re-discovered, as part of their continuing effort to absolve their products of any role in global warming, which they now grudgingly admit exists, while denying any responsibility.  Even more recently, the occupant of the White House referred to “Beautiful, clean, coal.”

        The other group is primarily composed of those who out of religious conviction simply cannot allow themselves to think that their particular sky magus would do such a thing, or that we as humans can actually exhibit any effect on a world which (holy writ claims) was created a mere 46oo years (or so) ago by a perfect creator. These are the same folks who, seeing the topographical indices of the numerous strata created and land sculpting done by the Bonneville and Missoula floods (completely different in nature and layered sequentially over millennia both before and after the last ice age), simply cite them as proof of the “Noah” flood. These folks, devout and sincere in their lunacy, are truly frightening to me.

        A subset of these are those who, when told by  someone representing either cult, that global warming and climate change doesn’t exist or cannot be moderated, simply nod agreement because it’s easier than thinking.