It is interesting that Darwin has been here a lot longer than the politicians and scientists and has done a very good job. Don't follow that? That is the point of this blog.
The modern thought process by our current generation of College professors and the kids who graduated from their classes is that us humans are the major cause of global warming. This whole thing can be divided into it parts for better understanding. First, we need to answer the simple question, "do we really have global warming?" If the answer to this first question is "no", why are we even having this discussion. If I grant some latitude that the answer "may" be "yes" we can go on to discuss other aspects.
Rather than just discuss short range impacts of global warming, why don't we jump to the "end game" and discuss how global warming will end up after it runs its course. Think about what this world will look like after global warming has run it course. I think that most scientists agree that many of us humans will die off because the places where they live will become totally uninhabitable. Let's start with that point--"totally uninhabitable".
if you look around, you will find places on Earth that are currently uninhabitable. How about those? Look at Death Valley in California. It is hotter there than what many places are projected to be due to global warming in the next several hundred years. The world has not come to an end due to the special climate of Death Valley and it won't if other places become uninhabitable. Look at the Dust Bowl in Oklahoma? When that area became uninhabitable, the humans who tried to live there moved to places less affected, like California. We called them Okies. You remember that!!
Remember Easter Island? It had a lot of trees when the first humans showed up and they thrived. Over time the number of humans grew and grew until they cut down all the trees for fuel and building material. Had the same trees all died because of global warming, the net results would have been the same. Unlike the Okies who moved to California, the humans on Easter Island could not leave because they had no wood to build boats. Darwin stepped in and let most of the humans die off until Easter Island could grow enough food for the few humans who were left. This is how Darwin will deal with global warming. If those human on Easter Island were allowed to leave Easter Island and go to another island, the process of over population would have continued until that new island also died off. The only advantage is that the final die off was delayed by a few years.
Isn't that what we are looking at with global warming given how we are currently dealing with it? No matter how bad it gets here on Earth due to global warming, there will still be places where humans can survive. Look at Eskimos in Alaska. They live in a very uninhabitable place, but they have been living there for several thousands of years. Darwin just keeps the population density down to a point that norther Alaska can support. If humans are the cause of global warming, then as most of the humans of the world die off, global warming should stop! Right!! You can't have it both ways.
Now, look at the USA. We only have 75 people per square mile and millions of trees per each of our citizens. Compare that with countries who have many times our density and many fewer trees per citizen. Why should we save them at our expense when they over populated their own countries? Why should we allow them to come here like Okies came to California. Let Darwin deal with them!!!
PS--This is a repeat. The right strategy for global warming is not to prevent global warming, but to be one of the survivors. To do that we need to be the wealthy and have a low population density. Squandering our wealth trying to prevent global warming and allowing in more and more immigrants makes both key things above much "worse"!!! Once the human die off as a result of global warming has run its course those of us who survive will gradually get back to normal.
The modern thought process by our current generation of College professors and the kids who graduated from their classes is that us humans are the major cause of global warming. This whole thing can be divided into it parts for better understanding. First, we need to answer the simple question, "do we really have global warming?" If the answer to this first question is "no", why are we even having this discussion. If I grant some latitude that the answer "may" be "yes" we can go on to discuss other aspects.
Rather than just discuss short range impacts of global warming, why don't we jump to the "end game" and discuss how global warming will end up after it runs its course. Think about what this world will look like after global warming has run it course. I think that most scientists agree that many of us humans will die off because the places where they live will become totally uninhabitable. Let's start with that point--"totally uninhabitable".
if you look around, you will find places on Earth that are currently uninhabitable. How about those? Look at Death Valley in California. It is hotter there than what many places are projected to be due to global warming in the next several hundred years. The world has not come to an end due to the special climate of Death Valley and it won't if other places become uninhabitable. Look at the Dust Bowl in Oklahoma? When that area became uninhabitable, the humans who tried to live there moved to places less affected, like California. We called them Okies. You remember that!!
Remember Easter Island? It had a lot of trees when the first humans showed up and they thrived. Over time the number of humans grew and grew until they cut down all the trees for fuel and building material. Had the same trees all died because of global warming, the net results would have been the same. Unlike the Okies who moved to California, the humans on Easter Island could not leave because they had no wood to build boats. Darwin stepped in and let most of the humans die off until Easter Island could grow enough food for the few humans who were left. This is how Darwin will deal with global warming. If those human on Easter Island were allowed to leave Easter Island and go to another island, the process of over population would have continued until that new island also died off. The only advantage is that the final die off was delayed by a few years.
Isn't that what we are looking at with global warming given how we are currently dealing with it? No matter how bad it gets here on Earth due to global warming, there will still be places where humans can survive. Look at Eskimos in Alaska. They live in a very uninhabitable place, but they have been living there for several thousands of years. Darwin just keeps the population density down to a point that norther Alaska can support. If humans are the cause of global warming, then as most of the humans of the world die off, global warming should stop! Right!! You can't have it both ways.
Now, look at the USA. We only have 75 people per square mile and millions of trees per each of our citizens. Compare that with countries who have many times our density and many fewer trees per citizen. Why should we save them at our expense when they over populated their own countries? Why should we allow them to come here like Okies came to California. Let Darwin deal with them!!!
PS--This is a repeat. The right strategy for global warming is not to prevent global warming, but to be one of the survivors. To do that we need to be the wealthy and have a low population density. Squandering our wealth trying to prevent global warming and allowing in more and more immigrants makes both key things above much "worse"!!! Once the human die off as a result of global warming has run its course those of us who survive will gradually get back to normal.
