About once a year I stir things up with a controversial
blog, in the misguided belief that I can change a single mind. It’s that time again.
Do you watch old movies?
How does all that smoking look now?
I always despised smoking, and I’ve lost numerous friends to
lung disease caused by it.
My parents were heavy smokers that lived into their 80’s before
their lungs gave out, so their lives may not have been shortened that
much. I can remember the discussions we
had. They always used to say that when
they started smoking they didn’t know it was bad for them. I used to counter that yes, but you had been
smoking for 20 years when the Surgeon General gave you the bad news, and you
continued for 40 more years. I lost
those arguments. They never quit. On his deathbed, the last thing my Dad asked
me was, “Did you bring me a cigarette?”
I find it pretty cool that we have by and large eradicated
smoking in the U.S. It is also kind of
interesting that the change was brought about more by lawyers than
lawmakers. I won’t be around to see it,
but I can’t help but wonder what the ultimate outcome will be as lawyers set
their sights on football, guns, and even education. It’s going to be an interesting century.
I have a little more sympathy now in my 60’s. I wouldn’t recommend my eating habits to
anyone and even though I try from time to time, it’s damn hard to change them. I sure do enjoy good food. And bad food.
Regardless, I’ve always said that, in the rearview mirror we often look
pretty stupid. As time rolls on, people
will say, “What made you think it was a good idea to suck smoke into your
lungs?” Well, it seemed cool at the
time. What else can you say? “Rick, what made you think it was a good idea
to never eat a vegetable?”
Which brings me to global warning, or climate change.
I’m not a scientist (a favorite line) but I kind of trust
them. I like my cell phone. I even got rid of my land line. I like my car. I like my HD TV. I like my doctor. I like the fact that I’ve made it to 62 when
I wouldn’t have made it to 50 if I’d been born a century earlier. When I was growing up I read Dick Tracy and
watched Star Trek, and look where we are today.
It was science fiction. It’s not
fiction anymore. We’ve done pretty well
by science.
No, I’m not a scientist.
What is a scientist? A person who
is dedicated to a single subject. They
spend years in school. They spend
countless hours in labs. They do
experiments. They analyze the data. They think about their field of study most of
their waking hours and that is their passion.
What is your passion? Books? Wine?
Television? Your business?
Well a scientist earns our trust as they study disease, and
medicine, and the earth, and space, and yes the weather.
And it goes without saying that they are
human, so they make mistakes too. Our
country, more than any other, is responsible for so much science, to borrow a
phrase from Mark Watney, “we’ve scienced the shit out of it.” Life that is. Imagine a day, just 50 years ago, when we had
to walk all the way to the TV to change the channels. The three channels. The 3 black and white channels.
Scientists study, develop, innovate, and we advance. So, before I go refuting scientists I’d need
a whole lot of reason, especially looking down the barrel of an overwhelming scientific consensus.
But for some reason, there’s one science that one political
party in one country rejects, and it happens to be my country, the greatest
country there has ever been.
Why would a party deny this one thing – that some things we
are doing are accelerating climate change?
Well, two reasons it appears to me.
First, if it is a truth, it is an inconvenient one that, if addressed as
advocated, could radically interfere with corporate profits. Exxon, and others, have waged a 20 year disinformation
campaign to protect their profits that would make the tobacco lobby green with
envy.
Secondly, it may conflict with the
faith aspect, that only a God controls the climate, not man.
There is recent precedent however to refute those points. Excessive aerosol spray put a hole in the
ozone layer, and we banned aerosol spray and closed the hole. Great work scientists. Great work America. Crisis averted. Glad we did it. The economic impact of less aerosol spray has
long since been diluted into the larger economy. Anybody remember smog? It’s not as prevalent, despite the
unpopularity of catalytic converters. We all hate them. Addressing
global warming as advocated would be significantly more costly. Would it be worth it, to again disrupt our
economy? It’s certainly a worthwhile
argument.
Let’s have it.
In one of the recent debates, candidate John Kasich broke
with the Republican establishment (he’s doomed) and said that he believed that
humans were affecting climate change, and then he hinted that maybe, just maybe
there was another great opportunity for America in wind, solar, nuclear,
natural gas, and even coal burned cleanly.
Lead the world in innovation? Us? The crowd that had just cheered candidate Marco Rubio's answer to the same question, was silent. Rubio had said that he was all for mitigating the effects of climate change and rising seas.
Address the symptoms, not the cause. Glad scientists don't take that approach.
And the leading candidate, Donald Trump, thinks its a Chinese plot. (He's wrong about that, although he is right about currency manipulation.)
I haven't watched the debates much, but I doubt that the environment has come up much.
It's a hot potato. Better to not talk about it.
Here’s my bottom line on climate change.
Why gamble with our planet?
Is this where we really want to stake our ideological claim,
when THE PLANET is at stake?
Is this where we really want to gamble?
Do we really want future generations to look back at us and
say, “You knew, and you did nothing?”
(another movie quote)
Is this the time and place for this pissing match?
Wouldn’t it be safer to assume that we are changing the
climate and take steps to address it?
What happens if we’re wrong and climate change is
inevitable??
What’s the cost?
Money?
When you’re dead, money won’t matter, but your legacy
will. And your grandchildren, and great
grandchildren will be living on the planet you left for them.
Do you want them to be proud of you, or laughing at you?
Your call.
Here’s one last example of how we can change. I heard the stories growing up in Pittsburgh,
so these are pictures that have always fascinated me.
The first one was taken at 9 am on a winter morning in 1945.
The second was at 11 am on November 5, 1945.
The steel city was so clouded in smoke from the steel mills
that the sun was rarely seen.
The city had no choice but to enact smog control
measures. Then they began to clean up,
which is what the third picture shows.
Ultimately the city continued as a steel center for 50 more years. Now it is a vibrant city with new economic
engines.
The degree to which he does can be argued about.
Gamble all you want.
Gamble with the economy.
Gamble with the taxes in Kansas.
Gamble with a ridiculous budget deficit.
Gamble with your lungs.
Gamble with email servers.
Gamble with immigration.
I really don’t care.
If it doesn’t go your way, you can even gamble and move to
another country, as so many are threatening to do now.
But you can’t move to another planet.
If we’re wrong all it will
cost is some money.
And here’s some news.
You ARE going to die.
Having shitloads of money won’t change that.
Leaving a ton of money to your next of kin may be good for
them, it may not.
Leaving a planet to them – definitely good.
If you think I’m just a mouthy liberal let me enlighten you
as to why I’m an independent:
I am often socially liberal, but fiscally conservative.
Yes, money is important.
I take the extremely conservative position that to save this
country we need to stop spending more money than we take in as revenue, or we
run the risk of financial collapse.
To me a Democrat will spend one third more than they take
in.
A Republican will spend 33% more than they take in.
They both wield the Great American Credit Card with criminal
impunity.
They both are fiscally irresponsible, and those chickens are going to come home to roost as well.
We need a Balanced Budget Amendment more than anything I can
think of, and it’s the one issue I haven’t heard anything about during the
campaign.
There is absolutely no respect for the American Tax
Payer.
I don’t mind taxes – I mind how they’re spent (wasted.)
Our government is putting our beloved country at great risk the
way they spend money we don’t have.
But, putting our planet at great risk is something
else.
Yes, earth is going to change over the centuries.
We don’t need to accelerate it.
Let’s not gamble with the planet.
We’ve only got one.
