Sunset
According to a Channel 4 UK television documentary, global warming may have more to do with sun spots than human generated carbon emissions.
If this is true, global warming may be a slower phenomenon than currently believed, which is reassuring, but also one which we can do nothing about, which is much more scary.
The point was made that planet Earth has gone through proven cycles when temperatures ranged widely across the globe. The North and South poles have been melted long before the internal combustion engine was even a twinkle in the eye of homo sapiens. Ice ages have come and gone with no intervention from human beings and there is no reason to believe that this will not happen in the future.
One of the most important points made was that atmospheric carbon increases happened naturally as a consequence of higher Earth temperatures which were primarily caused by changes in the Sun’s emitted radiation and can be monitored by observing Sun spots. When sunspot activity was high over many years, there was a slow increase in Earth’s surface temperature and then, subsequently, an increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The argument made by the television programme was that the amount of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere caused by the sun’s changing activity was vastly more significant as an effect on the world’s climate than the activities of humanity.
In the Sunday Times, the more popular view about the causes of global warming and it’s possible consequences, were comprehensively documented and they were scary indeed.
Depending on, how successful international governments would be in stemming the outflow of carbon dioxide, a number of outcomes for the global climate were considered. None of these outcomes were pleasant. They varied from extremely inconvenient, with many human beings dying through lack of water, to global disasters of Armageddon proportions with city’s underwater and fireballs rained through the skies and devastating all in their path. Estimates as to the probability of the different outcomes considered tended strongly towards the pessimistic. What was particularly perturbing was that all these horrors could happen very quickly, within the next 50 years or so.
Stories that the end of the world is nigh have always been a good way to sell newspapers. On the other hand, there are also powerful vested interests keen to keep us using oil and other fossil fuels. It is obviously necessary to question the message, the messenger and the science behind predicted outcomes.
Worryingly, although the two messages might appear to be contradictory, at first sight, they may not necessarily be so. The television programme suggested that global warming was caused by astronomical events and the newspaper article claimed that global warming was caused by human events.
But, does it matter? If either or both of these stories are true, from the point of view of the man in the street, the outlook is grim, whether it is in decades of hundreds of years.
Perhaps there is one good thing that may come out of the debate. If it stimulates a greater interest in astronomy and the world around us amongst ordinary people, we may at least understand better what is happening to us when it happens.
Bye for now
Rob
