Wednesday, October 21, 2009

In The Name of Global Warming! What More in the Name of Global Warming?!

To begin, I don't deny that global warming is an issue of concern for us. I don't deny that it is our responsibility to be good stewards of the earth. That said, I wonder how far we should go in the name of global warming. Is there a 'too far' in this matter, if it means keeping the poles from melting and causing utter destruction? Can man even pretend to have a definite role in its reversal? We can't even completely predict the weather. How far should Congress go to prevent climate change?

Congress has passed an energy law that phases out the incandescent light bulb (Edison's baby) starting in the year 2012. Why? To reduce electricity and greenhouse gases. Earlier this year, the controversial cap and trade bill was passed. Why? For "environmental accountability". I guess we'll see what those do for us.

Andrew C. Revkin, a contributor to the New York Times, is now suggesting that it would be useful to consider population control as a possible solution for saving the earth. Why? Because, "
More children equal more carbon dioxide emissions." He even wonders if we'll be seeing carbon credits given to couples who choose not to have children. (As a side note, in 1968 a best selling book, "The Population Boom" was published predicting that mass starvation would occur in the 1970's and 1980's due to over population. Interesting...). Luckily, this is just one man's opinion and we haven't heard the idea entertained politically. Hopefully, it won't.

But, with our global warming concerns, I feel like there is a growing belief that man is a plague to this earth. The description of Revkin's blog states,
"By 2050 or so, the world population is expected to reach nine billion, essentially adding two Chinas to the number of people alive today. Those billions will be seeking food, water and other resources on a planet where, scientists say, humans are already shaping climate and the web of life." Doesn't that make our existence here sound like an inconvenience?

Isn't it interesting that in the commandment for us to "multiply and replenish the earth", that 'multiply' is followed by the word 'replenish'?


  1. Anyone who has driven through Texas knows that there is plenty of space for 10 Chinas.

  2. And don't forget Alaska.