It's in the archeological finds that inform our natural history and science. There were seas where there is now desert. There were ice ages. In living systems, stasis = death, so of course there has been change, and will be. Did humans cause it? Not significantly more than any other life form, now extant or in the past, would be my guess, but I'm pretty sure the question is also mostly irrelevant.
I found this piece on the topic interesting and refreshingly different from the usual gloom and doom. Bold is mine.
Washington Post - should be a paywall-free link for more.
I found this piece on the topic interesting and refreshingly different from the usual gloom and doom. Bold is mine.
The Brookings Institution reported in September 2018 that humanity had reached a stunning milestone: “For the first time since agriculture-based civilization began 10,000 years ago, the majority of humankind is no longer poor or vulnerable to falling into poverty.” More than half of the world’s population — some 3.8 billion people — now earned enough to be considered “middle class” or “rich.”
Think about what that means: For most of what Ronald Reagan famously called mankind’s “long climb from the swamp to the stars” the norm for most people had been abject poverty. Now, the norm is prosperity.
What made this transformation possible? The collapse of the Soviet empire, the worldwide turn away from socialism, and the U.S.-led global expansion of free trade and free enterprise — fueled by access to cheap, reliable sources of energy — all have lifted people across the world out of poverty.
We should be doing everything possible to accelerate this progress, so millions more can join the ranks of the middle-class majority. Instead, climate activists are advocating policies that would deny poor nations access to inexpensive, abundant fossil fuels they need to develop their economies — which would ultimately leave tens of millions of people in poverty and more vulnerable to climate-induced disasters.
To make up for lost economic growth, activists are pushing government-to-government wealth transfer payments. First came a proposed $100 billion-a-year fund that rich countries agreed to a decade ago to pay poor countries to reduce emissions and forgo fossil fuels. Now, at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Egypt, known as COP27, wealthy nations have agreed to pay poor nations reparations for costs of natural disasters supposedly caused by the industrialized world’s use of fossil fuels.
This is insanity. The reason poor nations suffer disproportionate damage from natural disasters is poverty. When Hurricane Ian hit Florida in September, it caused lots of damage but relatively few deaths. Power was restored and bridges swiftly rebuilt. By contrast, a similar storm hitting poor countries could kill thousands and disrupt the economy for years because better infrastructure does more to save lives than cutting emissions.
<snip>
The fact is, nations with higher GDP enjoy lower mortality, higher standards of living and greater resilience. Their citizens live in sturdy homes with middle-class luxuries such as air conditioning and central heat that protect them from temperature-related deaths. They have access to better health care and food security, which does more to fight malnutrition than reducing carbon emissions. And their societies can afford advanced flood-control and disaster warning systems, such as the European Flood Awareness System. There is a reason, as global poverty has dramatically declined, climate-related deaths from floods, fires, storms, droughts and extreme temperatures have plummeted.
Climate change is real. But forcing developing countries to abandon fossil fuels — and denying tens of millions the opportunity to join the nascent global middle class — will cost more lives. And no amount of reparations could ever make up for that.
Think about what that means: For most of what Ronald Reagan famously called mankind’s “long climb from the swamp to the stars” the norm for most people had been abject poverty. Now, the norm is prosperity.
What made this transformation possible? The collapse of the Soviet empire, the worldwide turn away from socialism, and the U.S.-led global expansion of free trade and free enterprise — fueled by access to cheap, reliable sources of energy — all have lifted people across the world out of poverty.
We should be doing everything possible to accelerate this progress, so millions more can join the ranks of the middle-class majority. Instead, climate activists are advocating policies that would deny poor nations access to inexpensive, abundant fossil fuels they need to develop their economies — which would ultimately leave tens of millions of people in poverty and more vulnerable to climate-induced disasters.
To make up for lost economic growth, activists are pushing government-to-government wealth transfer payments. First came a proposed $100 billion-a-year fund that rich countries agreed to a decade ago to pay poor countries to reduce emissions and forgo fossil fuels. Now, at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Egypt, known as COP27, wealthy nations have agreed to pay poor nations reparations for costs of natural disasters supposedly caused by the industrialized world’s use of fossil fuels.
This is insanity. The reason poor nations suffer disproportionate damage from natural disasters is poverty. When Hurricane Ian hit Florida in September, it caused lots of damage but relatively few deaths. Power was restored and bridges swiftly rebuilt. By contrast, a similar storm hitting poor countries could kill thousands and disrupt the economy for years because better infrastructure does more to save lives than cutting emissions.
<snip>
The fact is, nations with higher GDP enjoy lower mortality, higher standards of living and greater resilience. Their citizens live in sturdy homes with middle-class luxuries such as air conditioning and central heat that protect them from temperature-related deaths. They have access to better health care and food security, which does more to fight malnutrition than reducing carbon emissions. And their societies can afford advanced flood-control and disaster warning systems, such as the European Flood Awareness System. There is a reason, as global poverty has dramatically declined, climate-related deaths from floods, fires, storms, droughts and extreme temperatures have plummeted.
Climate change is real. But forcing developing countries to abandon fossil fuels — and denying tens of millions the opportunity to join the nascent global middle class — will cost more lives. And no amount of reparations could ever make up for that.
Comment