Glaciers are growing

Well, I'm finally back for more posting. I'm admittedly not much of a blogger (i.e. it has been 10 months since my last post), but I am going to become more diligent...or opinionated...nah, I'm already pretty opinionated. ;)

A lot has happened in the last 10 months...elections are coming up, the sub-prime housing racket (excuse me, market) has collapsed, the economy is in a 'down turn' and so many companies are talking about 'green' that you can't get away from it.

Speaking of green, the motivation to blog today actually came from an editorial piece in our local newspaper. The piece was poking fun at Obama for having the power to 'heal the planet'. Political opinions aside, this caught my eye. In short, the writer was jokingly pointing to a recent report that the Alaskan glaciers actually grew across 2007 - 2008 as a correlation to Obama's previous statements that the planet would begin to heal if he is elected. Hold on a sec...did the writer really say that the glaciers "grew"? This can't be possible...not according to all of the scientists and 'green' experts around the world. After all, our planet is melting before our very feet, right?

So, I had to go check his sources and found the following article:

http://www.dailytech.com/Alaskan+Glaciers+Grow+for+First+Time+in+250+years/article13215.htm

Sure enough, the glaciers in Alaska grew over the past year. I like the article, but I seriously doubt it will make it to the mainstream media's front page.

Why?

Well, for one, it points out that the planet has been warming since the 1700s. Sure, the Industrial Revolution kicked off in the mid-late 1700s...but I seriously doubt some machines in Britain had enough influence to spark "global warming".

Another reason, is it points out a 3 - 4 degree temperature change in our planet between the 1600s - 1900s that occurred as we "exited the Little Ice Age". I really don't have anything 'witty' to add to this, I think it speaks for itself.

You want another reason? How about it points out the limits and the arrogance of our scientific community? There are many brilliant scientists in the world, but science as a whole shows the arrogance of mankind. The fact that scientists look at a 60 year snapshot or even a 250 years snapshot (referencing the above linked article's comments about how much Glacier Bay has changed since Chirikof visited that area in 1741) and decide that they know how the planet acted over the past several million years (or will act across the next 100 years) is ridiculous. Then, the mainstream media jumps on board and begins stirring the 'fear' machine to get all of us 'lemmings' to follow along.

Do I think our planet is changing? Yes, of course it is. I think it is constantly evolving and changing and will continue to do so millions of years after we are gone.

Do I think our planet is warming? Yes, of course I do. Otherwise, how do you explain the Western Interior Sea that once divided North America (or other inland seas around the world that are now replaced by deserts)? I can't tell you whether tectonic activity caused the seas to disappear or a global warming trend caused them dry up. What I can tell you is that they are gone...and it happened long before man started "polluting" the atmosphere.

Yes, pollution is bad and yes we should take care of our planet. Unless NASA knows something we don't, it's the only planet we're going to have for a while. ;) I'm just not convinced that the trends we are seeing are entirely man-made. Our planet has been warming and cooling for millions of years and without our influence. Carbon emissions from SUV's didn't cause the planet to warm itself out of the previous ice ages and drilling for oil certainly didn't push the planet into those ice ages.

I'll leave you with this question...

When we are discovering new species of animals every day and struggle to study the deepest parts of the oceans, how can we truly be arrogant enough to say that we know how our planet is going to change over the next 100 or 1,000 years?