These and many such other factors, have a far greater impact on Global Climate, greater perhaps by many orders of magnitude, than that of all Human activities, let alone that of use of petroleum fuels for transportation That the World weather cycle is not properly understood and is not yet subject to realistic analysis is a given. Claims otherwise are not proven. Every so often a new and serious parameter is found that had not earlier been included properly in the simulation and which drastically changes the earlier interpretations.

The ways to reverse the damage to our water and soil and how to deal with the changing oceanic conditions (whether triggered by natural or geological causes or by such human activities as overfishing and improper disposal of harmful wastes), all need more detailed and balanced studies and appreciation.

Life on earth exists only in a thin ‘onion skin’ layer, which from the deepest ocean (Mariana Trench) to the Highest mountain (Everest), is a total of about 20 Kms thickness. This total layer which after all, on a 40 cms. diameter Globe is barely a small grain of sand thick, and even of which we humans are actually effective in only a very thin strata. Yet we arrogate to ourselves the ability to destroy the world when all that we can actually do is damage our local environment and our water sources and coastal waters.

Instead of seeking the answers where the problems really are, we seem to be seeking for them where it is easier to do so. Somewhat like the ‘drunk’, who having dropped his keys in the dark seeks to find them by searching under a distant light claiming it was easier to search there.

We also, seem to have a lot of people who seem to be in a hurry to be the first to sound an alarm and claim the credit for doing so and clamour for ‘Grants’ to be given to them even as they continue, running down the observations of others that do not agree with their claims.

It is a pity that such viewpoints contrary to the majority trend, instead of being given due consideration and if possible proved erroneous, are treated as treasonous comments and their proponents attacked and vilified in a personal and contemptible manner. A true scientist should attack the claims and not the person making the claims.(See the attacks on Michael Crichton on his fictional novel ‘State of Fear’ and on Bjorn Lomborg, the Science journalist, who wrote the book “The Skeptical Environmentalist, and even on many others scientists, such as Henrik Svensmark, Director of the Centre for Sun-Climate Research, and many others who are as fully qualified environmental scientists as anyone else, but who have found that their research and findings do not support the majority claims) Ofcourse, such contrary viewholders do not get any ‘Grants’.

This attitude of the majority makes one hesitate to blindly jump on the band-wagon. It makes one question what could be the real reason for such irrational and unscientific attempts to drown out contrary voices. Could this be just a matter of scientific reputations and ego or is it to gain access to a share of the really enormous amounts of funding involved to pursue specific fields of study and direct attention away from other perhaps more polluting activities and so protect some interests.

But perhaps, in their attempts to conduct such studies and to claim a share of the funds to do so, many of the scientists concerned are motivated to be ‘Chicken Littles’ crying out that the ‘Sky is Falling’ (remember the threatened ‘Oil fires winter’ that the Kuwait Oil fires did not cause!) and many others just ride along. After all at stake is millions and millions of dollars of funding. Some of the studies could actually be serious attempts to find the right answers, but many could be just that much ‘puff ’

It is true that we Humans by careless habits of our ever growing population can easily overload the sustaining ability of our local environment and degrade it disastrously, and we should therefore be more conscious of the effect of such habits and strive to modify them so as to avoid such degradation of our local environment, but can we rightfully extrapolate such local effects to global levels? Are we really such masters of the World that we are capable of unthinkingly destroying it? After all our total biomass is only a fraction of that of the many other species and insects. A single major volcanic eruption (e.g. Toba, Tambora, Santorini, Karakatoa) caused greater damage to the environment than all our puny efforts. The recent Mount Pinatubo eruption in the Philippines cooled the Earth down by more than the warming allegedly due to over 10 years of worldwide Automobile emissions.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8