Have you ever wondered if maybe those scientists have gotten
it all wrong?
The climate warnings have been so dire, but the costs of responding
are so great. Things we take for granted – spacious suburban homes, powerful performance
vehicles, the mobility to travel at will, fresh food flown in from distant sources
– would certainly have to change. If not, our kids would inherit a severely
damaged world, and their kids might not inherit much of anything at all.
But maybe it’s all alarmism. Even scientists can get things
wrong. Why should we change our lifestyle because of speculative computer
models?
In fact, they did get things wrong. Back in 2007 the U.N.’s
climate science panel (called the IPCC) issued its 4th
Assessment Report, and it was alarming. The globe was heating up, they
said. Sea levels were rising. Extreme weather events like floods and droughts
were increasing, and the polar ice was melting. It would all result in global
hunger, displacement of coastal communities, mass human migration, conflicts
over shrinking resources and the loss of terrestrial and marine species.
If we believed them, the future looked grim, unless the
nations of the earth acted promptly to protect the creation, and restore
climate balances.
But Americans are not easily pushed around – not by scientists,
and certainly not by technocrats at the U.N. Back then, only 8% of us believed that climate change wasn’t
happening at all; but by the next year, the number
had jumped to 11%, and then 16%. By 2010, fully 19% of us believed climate
change would never happen.
Perhaps the scientists had it all wrong.
A couple of days ago, we
reported on one way they did get it wrong. In 2007, the IPCC
projected that as early as 2044 the Arctic could lose a whopping 2.1
million km2 of sea ice. Here’ s the scary graph they gave us:
Well, in fact, the Arctic has been melting. Here’s the amount of Arctic sea ice cover on
August 15 over the last 33 years, measured daily by satellites for the National
Snow & Ice Data Center:
And,as I said, the U.N. scientists got their projections all
wrong. Here’s a comparison of the IPCC projections to what has actually
happened since 2000:
As you can see, the Arctic isn’t responding at all the way
the IPCC said it would. In fact, we’re melting the Arctic four times faster
than the fastest estimate they made in 2007. And if you look at the alarming trends
from the last few years – which may or may not predict a new trajectory –
Arctic melting may now be a runaway train. The consequences for faster global
warming, melting of the Greenland ice sheet, accelerated global sea level rise,
and even slowing the climate-stabilizing ocean conveyer currents are not fully known. But let’s not be blind: There will be consequences.
Scientists are fallible. Their models often miss something
important. At first, we take comfort
from this. But then the dreadful reality hits us: You can be wrong in more ways
than one.
The earth hasn’t seen this much earth-warming CO2
in the atmosphere for millions of years. And those scientists have mostly been predicting
slow, steady global warming. Bad, no doubt, but largely a problem for the
distant future – something to be solved after we balance the budget, reduce
unemployment, or counter nuclear threats from rogue states.
But maybe they’re wrong. They didn’t see how fast we’d lose
the Arctic ice. They didn’t see the extent of devastating droughts and
wildfires in the American and Russian breadbaskets. They didn’t see the pace of
food cost increases and the rapid spread of global hunger.
How do we respond to these challenges? We may urge our leaders to prioritize
climate action. We may take a serious look at our own carbon
footprint, and make changes to reduce our own harm. We may begin the conversation
among our friends, co-workers and churches.
But whatever we do, let’s not make the mistake of finding
comfort in the failure of the experts to predict the future. More likely than
not, the surprises will be unpleasant. My kids – and yours – are counting
on us.
Thanks for reading, and may God bless you.
J. Elwood
No comments:
Post a Comment