English Composition 1

The Cost of Cool

The Cost of Cool

ENG 123: Module 12 – Classical Argument

July 2008

Jennifer Reynolds
 English Composition 2

The Cost of Cool

I’m sure you’ve heard that mankind has only a few more decades to survive. We are in

the last days and we’re happily driving our SUV’s over the cliff to our demise. Hour long

programs on the television or proclamations from blogosphere tell of impending mass extinction.

And then there’s the rise in sea level that will flood most of the world’s major cities in Katrina-

like fashion. The amber waves of grain in Kansas will disappear as the Midwest becomes the

next Saharan desert. Famines and disease will finish us off because of the coal plants required to

power our big screens for the Superbowl. The general consensus is that we’re going to hell in a

hand basket and our greedy little species has done it to ourselves.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is leading the charge to save us

from ourselves. They’ve gathered scientists from around the world and are a clearinghouse of all

studies supporting the issue of anthropogenic global warming (AGW). The IPCC developed and

is the force behind the Kyoto Protocol that insists that nations make sweeping changes in

technologies, economies, industry and even culture to avert the threat. Members of the IPCC and

its supporters are motivated and sincere; I believe they are also sincerely mistaken.

A Really Inconvenient Theory

The issues we’ll cover that lead me to the above conclusion are: 1) AGW is not proven to

be occurring; much less caused by man, 2) the IPCC recommended combat strategies are more

harmful to humankind then the warming itself and 3) A much greater threat to humanity exists

that requires our attention and resources.

Deniers

Contrary to the point of view by the Nobel Laureate and Oscar winner for slideshows, Al

Gore, not every researcher is convinced of that global warming is as dire as the IPCC press
 English Composition 3

releases portray or that it is even occurring.

A series of ten articles in the National Post by Lawrence Solomon are an excellent primer

on the deniers counter-arguments to global warming and its dire effects. The first article by

Soloman (2007a) centered on the work of statistician Edward Wegman. He is arguably

successful in refuting Michael Mann’s “hockey-stick graph” upon which the IPCC, Al Gore and

other adherents of AGW have based most of their stance. The second article by Solomon

(2007b) discusses the work of Richard S.J. Tol, lead researcher at the IPCC. He contends that

the science is far from settled and continues to call for more study. He also believes that

mankind’s ingenuity is well able to compensate for the projected changes in the environment,

should they occur.

The Danger of Action

Goklany (2005) is an assistant director with the U.S. Dept. of the Interior. Using the very

studies contracted by the IPCC, he explains that their recommended measures may reduce carbon

emissions and its associated warming but only by stifling economic growth and industry. The

authors research shows human lives and wellness would be impacted much more negatively by

the IPCC’s policies to fight climate change then by allowing historic economic growth and

industry to adapt to it.

Pump up the Carbon

Solomon (2008) states that the global biosphere has had explosive growth over the last

couple centuries due in no small part to post-Little Ice Age warming. He also correctly affirms

that the planets present CO2 levels are much lower than they have been many times in the past

(millions of years prior to mankind’s fossil fuel burning). He raises a concern that, if the IPCC
 English Composition 4

has its way, cutting CO2 emissions could herald a cooling period that would severely reduce the

planets biomass production causing famines.

Setting the Stage

The above mentioned results of attempting to attenuate global warming would produce

conditions ripe for the actual, greatest threat to mankind. Increased food shortages and their

associated malnutrition would make millions of people more susceptible to disease. World

economies would be weakened by the financial burden of sequestering atmospheric carbon, high

taxes on fossil fuel use, cost of developing energy alternatives and the forced assembly of

entirely new infrastructures to support those alternatives. These weakened economies would

have reduced resources to address real hazards to the population. Third world countries, with

their emerging economies, would be most negatively impacted by IPCC policies.

The Hot Zone

The world population, due mainly to third world countries, continues to grow beyond

sustainment levels. To a virus or bacteria, every human is a petri dish. Each of us is an

experiment in Darwinism. Preston (1994) explains that mutations are constantly occurring

within microbes to improve communicability and latency; mortality is often a byproduct. The

higher those factors are, the greater the risk of a pandemic from the modified microbe. An

increase in population also increases the density of our species. This makes transmission of a

disease easier and the effects more pronounced. It is just a matter of time until a microbe

emerges that has easy communicability, long latency and high mortality. When that happens, a

pandemic will spread like a wildfire through the human race. It is inevitable and there is nothing

we can do to stop it, but we can apply the resources to prepare for it, to minimize its effects.
 English Composition 5

Conclusion

There are so many scientists supporting it and such coverage in the media on AGW, how

could they all be wrong? Consider that news media is a “for profit” business and creating a

market is just capitalism at work. Human psychology predicates that we pay attention to new

stimulus and the sensational sells papers and ad time; humans are motivated by crisis. As far as

science, though it is based on the unbiased search for facts, it is still practiced by fallible human

beings. University and governmental funding for research is granted based on priorities. Public

opinion affects those institutions priorities and the media affects public opinion. The more

exciting research that’s accomplished, the more news stories are generated. A feedback loop (or

feeding frenzy, if you will) ensues. The same doomsday loop occurred thirty-five years ago as

the example article by Gwynne (1975) illustrates. The weight of scientific research at the time

predicted global cooling and was the rage in the media for at least five years. This never

materialized and people moved to new crises to pay attention to.

Like the phantom menaces of the past (global cooling, Y2K, the red scare, etc.) global

warming will also become blasé and we’ll move on to a new crisis. My concern is that we will

waste our resources on a dead end and not be able to meet the real challenge when it appears.

More so, the proposed actions to combat global warming will actually increase the likelihood

and risk of the real crisis that looms.

 English Composition 6

References

Goklany, I. (2005, September). Is a richer-but-warmer world better than poorer-but-cooler

worlds? Retrieved June 12, 2008 from http://www.heartland.org/pdf/18856.pdf

Gwynne, P. (1975, April 28). The Cooling World. Newsweek.

Preston, R. (2004). The Hot Zone. New York: Random House.

Robinson, A., Robinson, N., & Soon, W. (2007). Environmental Effects of Increased

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide [Electronic Version]. Journal of American Physicians and

Surgeons, 12, 79-90.

Solomon, L. (2007a, February 02). Deniers Part 1: Statistics needed. National Post. Retrieved

June 14, 2008, from www.nationalpost.com

Solomon, L. (2007b, February 02). Deniers Part 5: The original denier: into the cold. National

Post. Retrieved June 14, 2008, from www.nationalpost.com

Solomon, L. (2008, June 7). In praise of CO2. Financial Post. Retrieved June 13, 2008, from

www.financialpost.com