Science: Fact or Fiction

Science: Fact or Fiction

            Imagine being trapped in a car where neither the doors nor windows function.  The heat is so intense that it makes the experience extremely uncomfortable.  The dizzying heat causes nausea and confusion to the point of being ill.  This blazing furnace even makes it difficult to breath.  The emissions must’ve found a way inside the vehicle, and it just may cause a loss of consciousness.  Every breath exhaled raises the level of carbon dioxide.  The Earth has a solution in the form of plants.  Plants absorb carbon dioxide and expel the oxygen humans need to survive, which maintains the balance needed to support life.  According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their February 2007 report, “Humans are pouring carbon dioxide into the atmosphere much faster than plants and oceans can absorb it” (“IPCC”).  Although elevated levels of carbon dioxide can be good to stimulate planet-wide vegetation, too much of a good thing is usually never good.  In fact, the evidence suggests that climate change is indeed real, it is anthropogenic, and may pose risk that should be carefully evaluated.

Global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased dramatically as a result of human industrialization.  Most notably from the mid-eighteenth century, these compounds now far exceed pre-industrial values as determined from ice core samples spanning many thousands of years.  This is important for multiple reasons, but most significant is their role in promoting what is called the greenhouse effect.  In his article “Importance of Sun Cycles in the Global Warming Debate,” author Gerald Westbrook does a great job explaining this phenomenon.  Westbrook adds, “One needs only to enter a vehicle on a hot [summer day]” to experience the phenomenon of the greenhouse effect.  When the windows are kept closed, “solar energy enters [the vehicle] in the form of heat, through a transparent media (glass) and then cannot escape.  This contributes to an elevated temperature.  The [vehicle] can re-radiate energy, but now as infrared radiation (IR).” IR energy has a different wavelength that hinders its ability to transfer, so it escapes at a lesser rate.  “This retained energy [continually] contributes to the internal temperature” (Westbrook).  Now imagine this planet is a giant Volvo with static windows, and all of the inhabitants are passengers.

There are many facets that must be carefully evaluated in order to determine the different possible outcomes of climate change, and global warming is only one of these facets.  According to the Stanford Solar Institute, “Global warming is defined—[as] a gradual increase in planet-wide temperatures–[and] is now well documented and accepted by scientists as fact” (Lee).  Over the past couple of centuries the warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in the global average of both air and ocean temperatures.  People often pull examples from current weather trends to refute the possibility of a warming planet, but this usually isn’t an effective argument. 

Although weather and climate are interrelated, the environmental protection agency defines climate as “the long-term average of weather conditions” (“Climate”).  Weather changes in erratic ways and can shift along a spectrum defined only by its extremes.  Weather is regional, happens quickly, and can change in rapid fashion.  In contrast, climate is the characteristics of weather patterns over the long-term, and is data that has been collected from all over the planet.  This data has been collected since accurate recording was made possible from technological breakthroughs happening in the mid-nineteenth century.  Data is empirical evidence in the form of statistics that is used to provide conclusive proof of, or sufficient evidence to support a theory or hypothesis.  This data is particularly intriguing because it has been examined and scrutinized.  It shows decisively that the trend of average global temperatures is indeed warming.  Lead author Shannon Lee observes: “Average global temperatures have risen by nearly one degree Celsius since 1880, and the last two decades were the hottest in [at least] the past four-hundred years and possibly [even] the past two-thousand years.  Even more troubling is that “studies indicate average global surface temperatures have increased by as much as one degree Fahrenheit over the last century alone, and average global temperatures may increase by [another] 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century” (Lee).  One degree doesn’t sound significant, but on a global scale it is quite drastic.  The warming aspect to the Earth’s changing climate poses real threats to many of the planets living species.  The most marked increases in average temperature have been documented in the polar regions of the planet.  If this trend continues, many of the species inhabiting this region of the world face an ever-increasing risk of extinction.  There are many other latent consequences to inadvertent climate change involving weather.

Hidden in these latent consequences are the risks that no one is talking about.   Some experts predict an upsurge in the amount of extreme weather events.  According to National Geographic News who examined the report released by the IPCC, this would include: “The [possible] increase in frequency and severity of droughts,” which may cause deserts to spread, and “water shortages for human consumption [and] for crops,” which may lead to “large scale food shortages” (“IPCC”, “Global”).  In addition, “there could be an increase in frequency and severity of wildfires” (“Global”).  The risks associated with a warming planet seem benign on the surface, but close scrutiny must be applied to all angles of this specific conversation.  These disastrous events may even become commonplace in the future, and “at some point warming could become uncontrollable by creating a so-called positive feedback effect” (IPCC).  To best describe this concept is to consider it as the turning-point in any good story, it could be labeled the point of no return.  Simply put it is a type of domino-effect; whereby, rising temperatures could unlock unknown amounts of methane that have built-up in permafrost regions, and release carbon that is trapped in sea ice, further increasing atmospheric concentrations.  Even more significant is that the loss in arctic ice would reduce the Earth’s ability to reflect solar radiation away from the surface of the planet.

The evidence does suggest that climate change is being fueled by human activity, and the proof is in the data.  The IPCC’s official report concluded that, “the planet is warming due to higher concentrations of Green House Gases (GHG).  Global increases in carbon dioxide are primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels, and the increases in methane and nitrous oxide are primarily due to agricultural changes” (“IPCC”).  For conditions to remain in a state of homeostasis there must be a maintainable balance, and for this to occur, changes have to be made.  Unfortunately people have become dependent on energy, and society might very well breakdown if these sources were eliminated.  That is bad news for this planet because, “even if such emissions were eliminated [altogether] today, the changes in the Earth’s climate could not be stopped immediately” (“IPCC”).  It appears that mankind’s addiction to cheap energy has come at an enormous cost after all.  This expected rise in temperature may alter what has been perceived as normal.  When surface air temperatures increase, the amount of water that can be absorbed through evaporation increases.  This allows the lower-levels of the atmosphere to hold more moisture in the form of water vapor.  It’s exactly the same way heat allows more sugar to saturate in a cup of tea or coffee.  This higher level of water-vapor saturation acts as fuel for subtropical cyclonic weather systems.

In reality though, hurricanes and tornadoes may be the least of all worries.  In the American Scientist article “Ocean Acidification: The Other Climate Change Issue”, authors Ashanti Johnson and Natasha White make a scorching observation that has been largely ignored: “Most of the carbon dioxide remains in the air” further contributing to global irradiation, but “up to 25% is absorbed by the world’s oceans” (Johnson and White).  When carbon dioxide mixes with water-vapor in the atmosphere it forms carbonic acid, which then falls to the surface as a mildly-acidic rain.  This rain flows from natural lakes and reservoirs into the many tributaries that make-up the planet’s vast river system.  Eventually this compound flows into the oceans, where water continues to evaporate leaving the acidic solution behind, ever increasing concentrations.

This latent consequence is perhaps the greatest risk to the planet.  Since the start of the Industrial Revolution (1750), the pH levels of the world’s oceans have steadily dropped.  Johnson and White argue that levels have “dropped by 0.1 units–which amounts to a 30% increase in acidity” (Johnson and White).  Estimates based on current status quo from the IPCC suggest that if current levels persist: “Oceanic pH could drop another 0.5 units by the end of this century” (“IPCC”, Johnson and White).  That may not sound like much, but that is an increase of 150% in acidity!  This could spell disaster for some of the most diverse marine life that humans forget they share this planet with. The Environmental Protection Agency asserts in their video that: “While in many situations humans can get use to changes in the environment; fish, plants, and [other] animals aren’t so lucky” (“Climate”).  This specific aspect of climate change could cause the mass extinction of molecular biological organism residing in the oceans, which “could have devastating [consequences] on marine life” (“IPCC”, Johnson and White, “Global”).  This reality is also acknowledged in the EPA’s video, “The safety and survival of ocean-dependent species have become a daily concern” (“Climate”).  It has been estimated by the IPCC that “more than a million species face extinction from disappearing habitat, changing ecosystems, and acidifying oceans” (“IPCC”).  In light of this information, the debate on whether or not climate change is possible should be over!

A positive correlation has been established for atmospheric carbon concentrations and global-warming.  This remains evident as, “the largest increase in surface temperature is largely attributed to the increase of greenhouse gases” (Johnson and White).  Due to inaction and continued consumption, “the rate of warming is expected to continue and accelerate over the next 50 to 100 years” (“IPCC”, Lee, “Global”).  It looks as though the human population is destined to expand, and fossil-fuel consumption will most likely continue to expand with it.  Other observations have been evident in cementing this argument.  Glaciers and mountain snow around the world is melting at an uncomfortable rate.  For example the National Geographic Society admits that, “Montana’s Glacier National Park now has only 27 glaciers, versus 150 in 1910.  Also compared to 1910, land in the northern hemisphere freezes a week later, and thaws begin a week earlier [in the spring]” (“Global”).  It isn’t only animals that are threatened by these statistics as it “could create water shortages in regions that depend on mountain-run-off for fresh water [sources]” (“IPCC”, “Global”).  With more ice melting, more water will be entering the oceans; whereby, an obvious assertion can be made: “Sea levels are expected to rise between six inches and three feet or more by century’s end or sooner”, which could possibly cause catastrophic displacement on a global scale!  “Some one-hundred million people live within 3 feet of mean sea level” (“Global”).  In fact, as much as 80% of the human population is concentrated in vulnerable coastal cities.

So could the warming that is being documented be from something other than human activity?  Many opponents have made remarkable claims arguing that the changes being documented are merely natural phenomena, and there is legitimate logic to support the idea.  One such argument is that most of the warming being experienced on Earth is due to increased solar activity.  The Stanford Solar Institute has been studying this angle in-depth in an effort to answer some of the most troubling questions in this regard.  Their take on this is that “solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellite for [only] the past thirty years.”  This isn’t enough time to collect the significant amount of data needed to provide conclusive proof one way or another.  However, “these precise observations show changes of [only] a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle.  [As a result], changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources” (Lee).  A few tenths of a percent over the past three decades is considered to be negligible considering, “11 of the past 12 years are among the hottest dozen warmest [years] since recording [officially] began in 1850” (“IPCC”, “Global”).  Another reputable argument against climate changes anthropogenic roots is that there are long-term climate fluctuations the planet undergoes naturally.  There is evidence to suggest that the “planet has indeed experienced warming and cooling cycles roughly every hundred thousand years,” due to shifts in the Earth’s orbit.  However, “such changes have occurred over the span of several centuries” and “today’s changes have taken place over the past hundred years or less” (“Global”).  In the follow-up report released in April 2007 the IPCC argues that: “Humans have caused all or most of the current planetary warming, and this warming will continue and accelerate if we do not take immediate action” (“IPCC”).  Unfortunately as of yet, humans cannot decide on what action to take.

The burden being placed on society’s current generation is a result of unfortunate policy based on poor analysis.  There are only four possible outcomes that can be derived from this situation:  either it is real or it isn’t, and humans either take action or they don’t.  The evidence suggests overwhelmingly that climate change is in fact real, and that humans are to blame.  Most recently the debate has been centered on whether or not humans even have the capacity to affect the climate, instead of focusing on the amount of altruistic sacrifice needed from the human race to overcome this enormous hurdle.  It is still unclear what is needed to restore an appropriate balance to the planet humans share with so many different species.  It seems an ever-increasing and daunting task, but hopefully there is a way to allow the Earth the capacity to continue harboring life.  The status quo predicts a grim future, even as we debate minor, petty geopolitical concerns on merely a partisan basis.  Regardless of political, religious, or ethnic affiliation; consequently all humans must share blame.  It is what humans choose to do about this specific situation that will define humanity with literally the fate of the entire planet hanging in the balance.

 

 

Works Cited

“Climate Change – Wildlife & Wildlands.” U.S. EPA’s Video Collection 22 June 2009. General       OneFile. Web. 27 June 2015.

“Global Warming Fast Facts”. National Geographic Society. February 2007. Web. 7 July 2015.

“IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate 2007”. Contribution Of Working Group I To The Fourth Assessment Report Of The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change, 2007. April 2007. Web. 7 July 2015.

Johnson, Ashanti, and White, Natasha D. “Ocean Acidification: The Other Climate Change Issue”. American Scientist 102.1 (2014): 60-63. Academic Search Premier. Web. 7 July 2015.

Lee, Shannon. “Global-Warming”. Stanford Solar Center. Stanford University. n.d. Web. 7 July 2015.

Westbrook, Gerald T. “Importance of Sun Cycles in the Global Warming Debate”. Offshore Aug. 1999: 153+. General OneFile. Web. 27 June 2015.