Maybe We’re Just Not Wanted Anymore

I frequently end up in discussion, and occasional argument, with a good friend regarding climate change. He is one of the most intelligent people I know. The type of person that has visions of change, societal improvement, and progress. He is a visionary, no doubt about it. He sees the environmental movement as the necessary, idealistic force that is required to reverse the unquestioned damage we are inflicting on our planet. I equate his vision, and that of all those "green", to past movements of change: civil rights, female suffrage, and glasnost. He openly admits that he has a utopian view of the adaptations we need to make as a society to preclude the environmental end of the Earth. His rationale is that all change requires overkill in the desired direction to ensure the more reasonable desired outcome. In other words, "I'm going to go overboard on this one because I know the behaviours of those that don't understand as much as I do will average it out." I commend him for his vigour.

I am not a denier of climate change. Not in the least. I compost, recycle, carry cloth bags, pick up litter, use glass over plastic, support "green" charities, explore nature, bird watch, reuse, buy used instead of new, use a reel lawn mower, drive a small car, take the bus – you get the point. There are days where I am whole heartedly on board the environmental movement to reverse this mess at all costs. Then, there are other days where I struggle with the big picture here. The source of this personal conundrum is not that I don't think climate change is occurring. Nor do I deny that we are the cause. My internal argument (yes I have ulcers) is that, as a society, we are so arrogant to think that we are destroying the planet. Think about it. When our unbridled consumption and waste kills off the very last human, will Mother Earth take one final shallow breath and just vaporize into intergalactic powder because she no longer has a raison d'être? I ain't no environmental scientist, but I certainly don't see it that way. She will begin the process of decomposing our carcases, recycling our mess and, depending on the sun's cooperation, voila a new civilization will emerge. Now that's recycling.

I am a true Darwinist. I believe the strong survive and the weak don't. I believe that all natural systems are cycles that should be left to correct themselves (hence my disgust with the financial bailout). So when we say that we need to do all those things in my green achievement list above to save the planet, do you think what we really mean is that these are the actions that are necessary to sustain our ability to live on the planet? In other words, aren't we more worried about our comfort on the planet than we are about the planet itself? Sometimes I think Mother Nature is trying to eliminate the parasites on her back and we are trying to cease a natural cycle from running its course. Are we arrogant to believe that, without us on it, Earth is "dead?"

I have a pact with this same friend that, if I am being kept alive with tubes, cables, and fluids that he is to come into my hospital room and accidentally trip over the power cords, yanking them out of the wall. He is to not say a word, give me a wink, and then go have a beer in my memory (I know this is far-fetched but we enjoy the possibility). We made this pact because I know my wife could never do it – she really is the best. Life support is, in my opinion, a waste of money and prolonged agony for loved ones. We treat our pets with more dignity than we do ourselves. So, by trying to reverse the effects of pure, unabashed human nature (i.e. gluttony) are we not just putting the planet-sized feeding tubes and ventilators in place? I agree with climate change sympathisers that the cause of this disproportional warming of the planet is a result of our disgusting desire to consume and waste with no regard for the consequences. This, I feel, the science has proven conclusively. What I wonder about is the lack of empirical study into the role of human nature in this cycle. Does our collective nature to act like pigs (they get such a bad rap) make the climate change phenomenon a natural cycle that should be just left alone? It seems to me that, to date, society has not demonstrated the willingness to make the mass sacrifice required to reverse climate change. I'm not saying I like it. I'm just telling you what I see. So is this noble cause a classic battle in futility? Are we being realistic?

For me it comes back, once again, to reasonableness. We should be responsible stewards of the planet, doing our best to be conscientious of the effects of our behaviour. Scientists should continue their efforts in the research of this issue, but at the same time maybe ask those questions that are currently unquestionable. I doubt science will ever truly accept that elements of human-caused climate change are a necessary cycle but asking these questions may result in a more realistic approach that society is ready to accept. I'll never be an expert but I'll continue to do my part. It makes me feel good – all within reason of course.