Climate Change Greatest problem ever?

Question

Is climate change the greatest problem humanity has ever faced?

I have heard mixed messages about this, like statements stating "humans have never been this doomed before?" or "We better change our ways before it is too late."

It is apparent that climate change IS a significant issue, affecting life on earth for future generations. But there seems to be a more reasonable and worthwhile approach to the problem of climate change than this Doomsday panic.

Here are some points I feel many people don't bring up:

1.) Human beings have faced many problems similar to climate change, especially in the last century. How quickly do we forget about threats of nuclear war. Likewise, climate change is just one environmental issue of great importance today, there should also be concern about others such as overpopulation.

2.) Many of the causes of climate change seem to be easily changeable or reversible, such as alternate technologies.

What do others think about this issue?

Answer 1

Why don't you people just watch "an inconvenient truth" rather than asking these same stupid questions over and over and over on here about global warming.

Answer 2

It's not caused by humanity any more than miniscule amounts. The sun appears to be the source of these minor changes here, not our activities.

Answer 3

No nuclear winter, follower by iceberg Earth, follower by alien abduction, followed by cloning, followed by d**k Cheney, followed by smoking in restaurants, followed by cell phones in cars, followed by right wing Christians, followed by nativity scenes in malls and public places, followed by guns, followed by George Bush. Well you get the point A group of concerned activists rated global warming just before infomercials in the mid 400s of greatest problems. I think it beat out high rent increasess.

Answer 4

Global warming is certainly a pervasive issue that's going to affect the lives of everyone on the planet.  However, humans will survive, as we have the technology to shield us from the worst effects of the weather.  

On the other hand, there are enough nuclear warheads on the planet to obliterate every human on the planet several times over in a very short amount of time.  That, to me, makes it a more pressing issue.

Answer 5

No. The one world government some seem to want to force on the rest of us would be a bigger problem than unproven theories (AGW).

Answer 6

I think it is going to be as devastating as the millennium bug.

Answer 7

It is almost certainly the greatest problem ever faced by humans.

This is because we're currently highly dependent on the source of the problem - fossil fuels - and we're quickly running out of time to solve it.  Scientists have estimated that we need to reduce our worldwide greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by the year 2050 to avoid catastrophic climate change, which is a very difficult goal to meet.

Nuclear war was certainly a big threat, but not one that threatened every species on the planet, and one which could be solved by simply not launching nukes.  Overpopulation is certainly an issue, but not one which threatens the surivival of our species.

Answer 8

No, global warming is not the greatest problem ever.  Heck, for all you know a meteor is targeting in on earth at this very moment.  Or some massive volcano will rock the world.  The biggest threat to humans has always been other humans!

Answer 9

climate change is the greatest problem faced by us IN RECORDED HISTORY.

however, you're absolutely correct that population is also important, and that the two work together against us.

it's likely that earlier in our existence, we also faced great challenges.  i think i've read that something, maybe the eruption of yellowstone, wiped out more than 90% of people alive at the time.  there is a genetic record of this, in our DNA.

Climate change will not kill us all.  it could change the environment enough that there will be wars over food and water, and with all of the nuclear weapons available today, we could do our selfs in, and could fairly easily destroy our technology.  if that were to happen, we'd probably live out the rest of our existence in stone age conditions.  we could never recover our technology because there is no more coal or oil to supply energy.

"Many of the causes of climate change seem to be easily changeable or reversible"

no.  our society is completely dependent on energy, and at the moment it could not function w/o coal and oil.  that's not to say that it won't ever be possible, but certainly not in the near future.

Answer 10

Earth is well prepared to fix the problem if we just stop polluting. We have the technology to move past the carbon debate. We do not have time to go through the government red tape. With oil on the decline, we have to make massive changes, swiftly. But we have to take the time to get it right. We can not do this twice, or three times - like in the past; we have to put our money in the best return on investments and where we get multiple benefits. We have had most of this technology for 20 years but have not implemented it. We know what is cost effective; we know where we need better technology. Without governments mandating renewable resources that do not harm the environment, we are doomed. The fossil fuel depression with global warming will be the worst economic downturn in world history. But this is not doom and gloom; we have the ability to fix our mess and enough time. Solar Concentrating Electric Power Plants, wind, wave, small hydro-electric, geothermal, and nuclear energy are what we need. We must have a pollution surcharge where we pay the real price (health effects, global warming and cleanup) for oil, natural gas, coal, cigarettes, cooling towers, cars, trains and airplanes. Raising the price of fossil fuel today gives us more time to solve these problems and helps pay for the 20 Trillion Dollars worth of renewable energy over the next 10 years. Remember knowledge is power and this information is very powerful. Humans have 50 trillion dollars worth of stuff that runs on cheep oil, natural gas, or coal.

I attended the Focus the Nation at Sierra College on 1-31-08. The event was the 2% Solution, a 2% reduction over 40 years to solve global warming. Oil is a nonrenewable resource and we are running out-but not soon – anyone now want to pay $30 per gallon for gas. The problem is the oil will be gone in less than 30 years at present rates of consumption without projected increases and shortages (gone at least to run cars, heat homes, power electric plants or air travel). The 2% Solution is ok for the USA for a 10 year plan to cut 20%, but I would prefer a 5% Solution over the next 10 years for a 50% reduction. At the same time, we have to be building renewable energy so at the end of 10 years we can cut an additional 20%. With the peak of oil in the 1970’s, peak NG in the 1990’s, having mined cheep coal, the peak of ocean fishing in the 1980’s, and the peak of uranium in the 1990’s, humans must stop procrastinating and make real changes to keep earth sustainable including in the energy debate, finance and regulation. Over the next 90 years carbon dioxide is projected to skyrocket as human’s burn more fossil fuels, but we have to come up with what will take its place and cleanup our mess. One of the big problems we have is at some time Yellowstone will blow its top again, as the magma move closer to the surface, creating a nuk winter. After that we will not have to worry about the destruction of the ozone layer, global warming or pollution.

Many of mankind’s advancements cause earth surface to warm, destroy the ozone layer, kill off endanger species, heat cities, and in some way cause more dramatic destruction.  Blacktop and buildings (roads, roofs and parking lots-heat cities), deforestation (air pollution, soil erosion), duststorms (increase hurricanes and cyclones, cause lung diseases), fires (cause pollution, mud slides, and deforestation), refrigerants (like CFC's) and solvents (including benzene destroy the ozone layer raising skin cancer rates) and plastics; cars, airplanes, ships and most electricity production (causes pollution including raised CO2 levels and increased lung and other diseases); these human problems we must fix to keep life on earth sustainable! Humans have destroyed half of the wetlands, cut down nearly half of the rain forest, and advance on the earths grasslands while advancing desertification which increases duststorms.

The result is:  change is on the way, we just do not know what changes (where and when). Look beyond the hype, beyond the weather, beyond a quarterly report and beyond today. President Bush has made a choice of energy (ethanol) over food and feeding the starving people around the world; this is a choice China has rejected. The fact is Bush wants to buy food from out side the USA to send to starving people since our grain is not available. Now what USA Presidential candidate is giving you the facts so you can make an educated decision of which one to vote for?

But with that we must understand we have never seen what is now happening before. CO2 has never lead to temperature change, but temperature change has led to increases in CO2. The models have to be made as we go along with current evidence! But again adding a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere enlarges the earths sun collection causing warming; increase water in the atmosphere and it forms clouds cooling earth but sometimes causing flooding. Even natural events are warming earth and causing destruction. The sun has an increased magnetic field causing increases in earthquakes (more destruction), volcanoes (wow, great destruction), and sun spots. Lighting produces ozone near the surface (raising air pollution levels). The USA Mayor's have taken a stand and I believe are on the right track, we can have control and can have economic growth. The sun is available to produce energy, bring light to buildings and makes most of human’s fresh water. Composting is the answer to desertification. New dams are the answer to fresh water storage, energy and cooling earth by evaporation, we need many small ones all over (California needs 100 by 2012 and we are far behind).

That is why I founded CoolingEarth.org, a geoengineering web sight where you can learn more about earth, the atmosphere, and how to sustain life on earth’s surface. Watch for changes in the sight coming soon.

Answer 11

You seem to have a good foundation regarding topics like these. Humans used to worry about many different very important topics like these in the past and wars were fought over different details of contention. Most of the real big issues in the 19th century were focused on too many people and too little land. Then farming technology got started with the invention of fertilizer. Maybe the 18th century was the most worry free and productive. Prior periods have big worries that are different than modern worries maybe because back then the world was flat.

Answer 12

No.  Man has survived many vast climate changes before.  Climate change is inevitable with or without our help. Various scientific groups have different views on just how much of Global Warming is caused by us and how much is natural. Unfortunately, we are not that far advanced to be able to identify with a high degree of certainty just how the Solar System varies.  We can't predict the Solar Cycle any further that about 6 years in advance, even with the very latest discoveries.  If we can't do that, how can we expect to predict what our Global Temperature is going to be 50 or 100 years from now.  That's a no brainer, WE CAN'T!  There are theories but, with scientific probing, we keep finding out new things that modify the way the Sun and the Earth and our surrounding environment really works, including Global Warming and our Reducing Magnetic Field Strength.

Most of the people in the world don't have a long enough history to understand what REAL climate change is.  Those who have the history can tell you that you adapt.  The Athabascans in Alaska claim to have an 11,000 year history handed down from generation to generation by mouth, just like the Hebrew history before the time of Moses and many other civilizations.    The Athabascan history goes back to when ice, miles in thickness, blanketed a very large percentage of the agricultural land that we depend on today.  That ice has been gradually melting away in the past 10,000 years. So much of it melted that all the oceans in the world have risen 300 feet!  Now that is climate change! Our varoius geophysical studies back up their history. And all of that change, without people wasting energy and burning vast amounts of fossil fuels. The ancient people survived the grand climate change. Others probably didn't because they were unwilling to take the measures necessary for their survival.

The most serious problem that mankind faces today is NOT his environment, but HIMSELF.  And this is something that we can do something about.  About 25,000,000 people killed each other over the 5 or 6 year period of World War II. In the Sudan, just a few years ago, one group of people killed over 1,000,000 or their neighbors because they didn't like them. These people didn't die due to starvation or disease, but  they were ruthlessly murdered by a group of people who looked more like themselves than like Europeans or Asians.

When man has a worthwhile noble goal we can work together to solve almost any survivability issue caused by our environment.  There are some relatively simple ways to solve our energy problem if we really wanted to. One example is to generate almost all of our energy source from nuclear power, wind, water, direct solar, etc.

We can restrict land use on all our low lying coastal areas just in case the 'natural' warming continues to melt all the remaining global ice deposits, which would cause the water level to rise as much as another 230 feet. We can do it if we have the will to do it.  But we don't have that will yet!

In the U.S. our technology has increased over the past 100 years to the point that we only need a few percent of the people to be food producers, instead of 30%.  If we can do that, why are there starving people all around the world?

Why can't more of the rest of our people be engaged in producing a new infrastucture based on electricity rather than the archaic use of fossil fuels.  Electricity can be produced in any way that we are willing to, but it is still electricity.  The machines that are driven by electricity work the same no matter how the electricity is generated, clean or dirty.  A noble goal to start a massive change of all our transportation systems to electricity would drive our economy to higher growth levels than we experienced during our last noble goal, pushing scientific and manufacturing technologies to successfully send several missions to the moon and back for the sake of scientific advancement.

If and when we get busy and get back to the basics of heading our efforts toward helping each other to have a reasonably good life, worldwide, our survival is almost assured for a relatively long time of gross environmental changes.

Every reasonable society in human history found a code of living to make life worth living.  Those codes were not pulled out of thin air, but resulted from eons of testing in the human experience. These successful codes survived since they were attached to the religious beliefs of their societies. Whether you believe in a God, Allah, Source, the Force, or any other higher or highest level of existence, the tried and true rules for our survival lie in the Golden Rule, treat others as you would like them to treat you.  When that is learned and practiced, there are very, very, few things that mankind can't do by working together.

Who cares if Global Warming is changing our lifestyle over the next 100 years, if most of us die due to human hatred for each other.

Answer 13

We face two problems that are slightly related, the poisoning of our oceans with excess CO2 and the depletion of our fossil fuel resources. both of which we should be dealing with at the same time as cutting our contribution to global warming.

Can mankind survive a complete global warming scenario? We have never done that yet, so we don't know from experience. The previous event was just before appearance of mankind. But our predecessor species had to have survived it. I derive that we probably would survive it even if it decimated our population.

There would be a significant shrinkage of the continents during the warm up. We expect disruption of populations out of near-desert areas and low lying areas. Melting of methane hydrate in the north would likely kill millions, but not billions.

Then as earth's atmosphere becomes nearly saturated with water, even our desert areas would become swamps. We would see flooding as the major world disruptor.

Finally, some group of volcanoes will trip us into a major ice age. This could cut our population and severely reduce world food production.

These are events over which mankind may not have much control. They are also likely out of our lifetime. Within our lifetime will be major repercussions from running out of fossil fuels, and from killing off most animal life in the oceans, result of loading with CO2 and other acids.

Answer 14

Considering that humans have lasted through at least one ice age if not more, I do not see how climate change can be the greatest problem ever.  The biggest problem is how to maintain our current lifestyle in the changing environment.  Also, how to move people quickly from low lying areas to higher areas where they can live as the coasts change like they have many times before.

As we become more technologically advanced, we may some  day find the way to do fusion effectively to solve most of our energy problems.

Answer 15

it is one of the biggest but not the BIGGEST

Answer 16

i think a nuclear war or super volcanic eruption would be far worse