Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Global Conditioning

Image result for Global warming trump cartoonThere is an Ice Shelf in frigid Antarctic, ready to slip away from the pack ice.  At Roughly 70 miles long and as wide as a football field and one third of a mile deep this is a massive example of glacial calving.   “Should Larsen C, the name of the ice shelf, throw off a Delaware-sized iceberg, it wouldn’t be terribly unusual in and of itself. Ice shelves naturally shed large chunks as part of their natural life cycles.  That’s just part of life for an ice shelf, says Ala Khazendar of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. That’s how they behave.”
Knowing that something is occurring and understanding why softens the inevitability of the consequences of that occurrence.  But when an ice shelf the size of the State of Delaware is about to fall into the ocean the speculation that follows will inevitably create its own firestorm of controversy.  As stated above, “That’s just part of the life cycle of an ice shelf”, but when taken from the contextual position of human interference the implications are nothing less than life threatening.  
Even though the scientist proclaim “that’s how they behave” the event has triggered a new round of hysteria with claims of rising sea levels and global warming with new calls to intervene and manage our affairs more judiciously, with the unspoken conclusion that had we done more in the past we could have prevented this tragedy from ever happening.  That may or may not be true.   The problem is there is not definitive process of understanding the why and what of global events only the conjecture of what might have happened in relation to what was known at the time.
The question that needs to be asked is in relation to what we believe the status quo of the earth is or should be and when we’ve made that determination how do we curb the natural course of life to fit within our myopic and static view?  In other words, when was the climate of the earth balanced with the needs of humanity and how do we sustain that hope?
As I have stated in the past, I do not discount man’s role in altering our earth’s climate patterns, nor do I discount our efforts nor our desire to effect change that would normalize what many consider to be abnormal patterns.  But again the questions that need to be asked are in many cases ignored.  When we have a massive ice shelf ready to float free of its icy surroundings the common response is “OMG, its Global Warming”, or more specifically “Do I need to use less water or lower my thermostat…?” With the end result always pointing to a selfish corporate policy of waste and corruption and the only way to solve the global disaster is to raise taxes, take away our rights and force us all to live with less.
There is an argument that might have some merit in relation to attempting to stem the tide of these massive global incursions but again a question needs to be asked, what is considered normal behavior for nature and who is to say what is normal or abnormal?  Has there ever been a “normal” in relation to human interaction with the weather?  Have we actually advanced enough to understand both man’s significance to all things Earthly and our impact negatively?
Anything is possible I guess and with enough information and know-how man can accomplish great things.  The science fiction writers have for years touted man’s ability to control nature rather than being controlled by it and that would have to include all facets of the natural realm including massive ice shelf’s, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes and may even include the occasional rogue asteroid careening toward earth.
Is our time the perfect time to set as a standard or is there a better time period to use as that global weather pattern needing to emulate and duplicate?  Are we only concerned with populated areas or areas of economic importance while disregarding the rest of the globe to fend for themselves?  Who will lead the way in the decision to decide what our weather should be and should always be?  It seems to me that the Global Warming believers would love to have a hard core process toward “normal”.  A new level of regularity could be the harbinger of all things governmental, with the overall process of standardization the responsibility of all, with the associated taxes, fees and regulations that are required in order to sustain that new level of “normal”.  
It may be normal for this ice shelf to crumble into the sea but when taken as a part of the whole this one instance may need much more scrutiny and inspection prior to the global determination of a forced Marshal Law pushed onto the world's governments and a true One World Order to establish and maintain the world as it should be.  If we are truly in a disastrous turn and we are all going to die then perhaps it is prudent to enslave the world’s population with the intent of forced compliance in relation to saving the world from ourselves.
Too much?  Crazy, impossible?  What is the end result for the Global Warming crowd?  Do they know when and where this will end?  The over simplified promises of the past Kyoto and Copenhagen accords allow us some incite but the process of determining an end game can only come when a specific target is acquired.  My entire premise depends on understanding where we want to be and why?  But first we need to decide on when.  When was our weather stable enough to duplicate and preserve for the benefit of man in general?
For thousands of years man has had to deal with the weather. It has always been a bit too cold, too hot, too windy, or too whatever and those variables change with almost every person making any definitive move toward standardization a very difficult process.  Who is to say what is too cold or too hot, too much rain or not enough?  When you finally decide, the political pressure needed to sustain the will of those who made the decision will be monumental.
As an example, In California we have been in a drought for many years and as a result we have been told and mandated to reduce our water use.  Politically you would think that when water shortages are in play the number of housing starts would be reduced to balance the current resources with the water availability but in this case the amount of water is never mentioned as a criteria for housing starts leaving me to wonder if the water shortages are a real concern or just a political ploy for inclusionary mandates to grab power and control.
If our levels of water availability are critical and require political interventions than why not reduce the greatest source of water usage within the residential community.  Greater still is the agricultural use of water, 40% of all water used in the state is used by agriculture.  It is very hard to make a final determination of who uses what, there are numerous statistical figures that claim agriculture uses up to 85% of the available water helping me to understand that this is ultimately not about the water but about amassing control and power.  This is not about global patterns of weather or climate, this is about power and the ability to create a system of control.  More taxes, more controls and less freedoms for all concerned.
I do not discount entirely the premise of Global Climate Change, man does have some negative effects on that process.  There are differing reports that claim increased global heating of the world with others that claim for a coming ice age (Weekly World News By Hideaki Tailor on January 30, 2012) but I do discount the political avenues used in the past in order to manipulate the population to acquiesce its rights and freedoms to the spurious political causes toward control and manipulation.    
Regardless of what you believe let me suggest that we never cow to the political pressure to give up our rights or freedoms for the spurious positions of the largely unknown effects of Climate Change nor to those political leaders who use fear to motivate us in those directions.  We should all be better stewards over our environment.  We should all take personal responsibility to manage our own resources with a global presence of mind to unify our efforts with those of others but we should fight against those who would suggest we return to a more “simple” time. We should fight against those who tell us to minimize our lives so they can continue to spend, pollute and preach.  
They would have us return to the horse and buggy days while they continue to fly and ride with impunity.  They are in power because we allow them to stay.  It’s time we realized our power and time to exercise that power for the good of all men everywhere.  Just ask Trump, look what we did for him!