350 Parts per Million

The people of the Earth ignore the dangers of global warming to their peril. This ecological crisis is a moral issue.

Article Tools

In 1988 James Hansen, a NASA scientist, testified before Congress that burning fossil fuels–coal, gas and oil–was warming the earth. At first the statement was met with scepticism, and public relations people from industry began actively sowing doubts about it. Yet, warm year followed warm year, until 2007 marked a watershed moment. Last year the earth experienced a dramatic surge in methane, a heat-trapping gas, from the melting permafrost that was accelerating further thawing. That same year the Northwest Passage stayed open all September for the first time in history.

Scientists now believe the earth has reached its “tipping point” for Arctic ice, which means the physical world on its own is taking command of the process that humans began. Some scientists predicted all Arctic summer ice would be gone by 2070, but now other scientists have revised the schedule for possibly 2012!

Further, the science community recognizes that the earth verges on crossing similar thresholds governing the reliability of monsoons, the acidification of the oceans, the availability of water from alpine glaciers and the actual level of the sea.

For the past one thousand years the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere hovered around 275 ppm (parts per million), but with the Industrial Revolution and the accelerated burning of fossil fuels that number started to rise. Twenty years after testifying before Congress James Hansen with several coauthors published their latest findings saying to preserve a planet capable of sustaining civilization, the amount of carbon dioxide must “be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm.” Standing at 385 ppm, the level of carbon dioxide is growing by more than 2 ppm annually!

John Paul II reminded us in early 1990: “Today the ecological crisis has assumed such proportions as to be the responsibility of everyone...I wish to repeat that the ecological crisis is a moral issue.”

Even with the weighty evidence from the scientific community clearly demonstrating the reality of global warming and its dire consequences, politicians and ordinary people hesitate to face the urgency of the situation. Some cling to denial, but others trust in science and technology to find a “silver bullet” to alleviate humanity’s rightful concern. Yet disasters happen because sometimes science can neither prevent a threat nor detect it early enough.

When the great tsunami hit Southeast Asia on December 26, 2004, a quarter of a million people died. In its aftermath, survivors were amazed at how few dead animals lay among the debris. Stories surfaced that hours before the deadly “Harbor Wave” struck, animals were fleeing to higher ground, even some elephants breaking their chains to escape. While animals apparently sense the natural signs developed over thousands of years to help them survive, humans seem distracted by material things that keep them disconnected from the messages of nature.

“An education in ecological responsibility is urgent,” writes John Paul II, “responsibility for oneself, for others, and for the earth...a true education in responsibility entails a genuine conversion in ways of thought and behavior.”

Our economic system based on growth from burning fossil fuels is ruining our physical lives by destabilizing the climate and altering the sea level. We are burning not only the furniture, but the studs in the walls to fuel the furnace. For the good of future generations and the survival of many poor today, we must somehow change our life styles and public policies and reduce the carbon dioxide levels to below the threshold number of 350 ppm.

Rev. John S. Rausch is a syndicated columnist and a Catholic priest in service to the people of Appalachia.



The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not of Spero News.
Add to Newsvine Add to Facebook Add to Digg Add to Twitter Add to DeliciousAdd to PropellerAdd to TechnoratiAdd to StumbleUponAdd to FurlAdd to BlinklistAdd to FarkAdd to Reddit
Opinion RSS
Comments
The pot on the stove has now begun to boil. As the Republicans were chanting "Drill baby Drill", the Gas vents of Methane were at that moment boiling to the surface of the newly iceless arctic expanses. The science gives us twenty years before the heat extinguishes life as we know it. The last time this happened, (the Permian-Triassic extinction) it killed everything including the insects. It took life 100 million years to reestablish itself.

We are living in a World without consequence. There will be no one to remember us. If we wrote our story in stainless steel, by the time someone evolved to read it, it would be unrecognizable. The impetus for decency must now only come from within.

According to science life automatically generates under the right conditions. If life is an automatic feature of certain landscapes why is it not "out there"? Why do we get not answers to our queries, why are the heavens silent?

Life's evolutions across the universe is an inefficient process that leaves unused energy behind as a byproduct. By the time life evolves to the point where it can "send a signal", it has already figured out how to harness this energy for its own uses. It is like a teenager on a motorcycle with the sudden influx of free calories. Wheeeeeee ! By the time life figures it out, it is too late. We evolved to the point where we could send a signal 50 years ago. In twenty we will be gone and silent. The probability of life "out there" contacting us has to include the factor of a 100 year time frame. The heavens are silent because they, the ones capable of sending such a signal, are dead. And now we set upon the path to follow in the mode for the same reasons.

by DanPride | Sunday, November 23, 2008  11:58:17 AM

This essay is profoundly wrong on just about every point. I`ve written a point-by-point rebuttal at my website.

http://www.timothybirdnow.com/?p=1392

Bear in mind, the Tropical Troposphere has hardly warmed; something that all the climate models say should have happened. Those models failed to predict the current climate when programmed with data from the past. There is every reason to believe that the slight warming of the late 20th century is driven by nature, not man. Even the rise in CO2 can be attributed to the Medieval Warming Period and not human industry. The oceans have actually cooled, something also in contrast to GW theory.

Is God in charge or not?

This is a purely political crisis.







by Timothy Birdnow | Sunday, November 23, 2008  10:13:58 AM

Your E-mail Address:

Privacy Statement
 


© Copyright Spero, All rights reserved. RSS
Spero News on Twitter
Submit a tip
Advertise
Terms of use
Privacy Policy
Contact
This page took 0.2500seconds to load