There is breaking news today – about the President, the Vice President, and a possible quid pro quo of US money for Ukrainian aid for the Trump 2020 campaign. There’s lots of speculation now, but we will soon know the answers. If it’s true the question will be – is this enough? I will write about it, but when there’s more fact than speculation.
Under the Soviet Moon
In the late 1950’s, The United States of America was caught with its pants down. The Soviet Union beat America into space. Sputnik was the first successful satellite placed in orbit, and soon Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space. Lyndon Johnson, then Senate Majority Leader and soon to be Vice President, warned of “…going to sleep by the light of a Soviet Moon.”
America went to work. We put more emphasis on space, starting with NASA and the Mercury Program. And we also placed a greater emphasis on math and science in public schools, to develop the skillset in American students to ultimately “win” in space. We were all on “the mission,” to quote President Kennedy:
“…We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills…” (NASA)
The Method
So as a boy in school in the early 1960’s I was raised on the “scientific method.” It was a way of analyzing problems, and trying to determine answers. Here’s “the method:”
- Make an observation.
- Ask a question.
- Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.
- Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
- Test the prediction.
- Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.
We learned to trust in science, in the method, and in the results.
Today science has made it very clear that we have but little time to “save the world.” Our planet is changing, the climate is warming, and it is dramatically impacting our life. Science demonstrates that one significant cause of that change is modern civilization, and more exactly, the byproducts of the use of carbon based fuels. We are changing our world, and, science tells us, that we have reached a tipping point. If we don’t alter the balance of carbon byproducts in our atmosphere by 2050, we will lose the chance to “fix” the problem.
Observation
We can see the impacts already (making “observations”.) We know that our “weather” has changed. The extremes are greater, the storms are more intense, the heat greater (and the cold, Mr. President, be careful what you wish for in the winter.) From Force Five hurricanes, to the storm system that quickly turned into a tropical storm and is flooding Houston today, they have all occurred before. But now it happens with much greater regularity.
And we can see the non-linear impacts as well. There is a drought in Central America, particularly El Salvador (National Geographic) and as a result, people are forced to leave their homes. Many are coming to the United States, not because they want to, but because they have little choice. We now have climate migrants, and a real issue at the Southern Border created by our changing climate. It will only get worse.
So when we “observe” all of this, we need to ask the question: why is our climate changing?
Hypothesis
Climate Change Deniers have “formed their hypothesis.” They really don’t deny the change, they simply say that the climate has changed in the past, and it’s doing it again. They say it’s part of the planetary cycle, and humans have little impact on it. So, it’s not our problem, not our fault, and not a reason to change our behavior. We need to just deal with the consequences.
That’s so damn convenient. We don’t have to take responsibility for melting ice caps, rising oceans, and extremes in weather. It’s not our fault, and we can’t do anything about it. So burn that coal, oil and gas. Let’s make the profit, before we all have to pay the price.
But there is a more “hopeful” hypothesis, and one that has been tested and found correct. We have dumped the waste products of our “hydrocarbon success” into the skies and waters. What we have put in the sky, carbon waste products, serves to “insulate” our planet and warm our oceans. This provides the “fuel” that changes our climate.
This hypothesis has been tested over and over again for years. Even back in 1977, Exxon-Mobil, the biggest oil producer in the world, had it’s own scientists predict that in fifty years their hydrocarbon emissions would alter the environment. We are almost there; our world has “tested their hypothesis,” and they were right.
Prediction
This doesn’t sound “hopeful,” but science offers us a way out. Make radical changes to our hydro-carbon use, stop dumping our “trash” in the sky, and we can stop mitigate the damage, and reverse the trend. We get to keep “our world.” We’ve got twenty years to get it done.
I’ve heard Millennials say it more than once: “I won’t have children, how can I bring them into a world which will be dramatically altered by the time their adults? It’s not fair to them.” They say that, because they have no belief in change; no faith that our leaders, government, or institutions can a make a difference. They are hopeless.
My grandfather was born in a time before there was human flight. My father was born before there was television. I was born before men went into space, or a computer could fit in a room, much less a pocket.
We will change, for better or worse, so why not now? We will do “…the other things…because they are hard.” The election of 2020 is a turning point in so many ways, but this is perhaps the most important one. Will we allow our own actions to damage our planet beyond repair, or will we step up, as we did in the 1960’s, and commit to change? It’s not for me, one of the Baby-Boomers; I’ll be lucky to see 2050. But it needs to be done for the Millennials, so they can have hope for the future, for their children.
There are millions of students on the streets today, demanding that we take action. They are fighting for their future. They are right.
