A verminous, potentially rabid rodent in Pennsylvania crawled out of his hole in the ground this week, saw his shadow and, according to the local vermin whisperers, gloated that he’s entitled to another six weeks of dreamy winter sleep. Everyone clapped.
I say shoot him.
I have to admit that this creature’s cryptic weather forecasts are more accurate than those of a British climatologist who predicted 22 years ago that snow would become extinct in Britain within a few years. He was dramatically wrong.
Of course, a few datapoints – that there have been some harsh winters recently and Punxsutawney Phil forecasts another one this year – do not disprove the phenomenon of global warming. If you want to analyze by anecdote, consider that winters in Colorado over the course of my lifetime have become a bit milder.
In any event, even though the British climatologist is a woke, needle-dick, politically correct, attention-seeking alarmist and a British one to boot, and one that I’d really like to, I wish he had been right.
It’s blasphemy to the pagan climateers but – and so – I’ll say it: To hell with snow.
Part of my snow-phobia is undoubtedly due to my advanced age. I’ve seen two millennia now – the present one and the one before, and I’ve read about others – and I’ve seen a plurality of decades (never mind how many). My old-ish body translates cold into pain. I don’t like pain.
But I also have more altruistic reasons for favoring the abolition of winter. Winter is bad.
The warmingites always skip over this part of the debate. They think they’ve won the argument if they can win the point that it’s getting warmer by a degree or two. But that’s only half the argument. The other half is, is warmer good or bad? I say that warmer is good. Here’s why.
First, warmer has history on its side. This graph shows a proxy for temperatures over the last 500-some million years, nearly back to the development of the sort of life we would recognize as animals and plants. (The 4 billion years before then were even warmer.)
You can see from the graph that the earth has usually been warmer than it is now. It was during that long warmer period that most life evolved. There’s a reason they call a few hundred million years ago the Carboniferous Period. It’s because the warm earth grew a spectacular, lush, verdant jungle that thrived and died for millions of years to become the massive combustible hydrocarbon deposits that we call oil, gas and coal.
Later, still in the mostly warm period, those massive animals that we call dinosaurs evolved and ruled the earth for 100 times as long as the current rule of humans.
Finally, over the course of the last 5 million years, humans evolved from more primitive primates. Note that people now need clothing to survive in most places. That suggests they evolved in a warmer environment, right?
Right. Fossil records show that during almost all of human history, as in most of the preceding periods, the earth was warmer than it is today. Life and the evolution of it, including the really big kind and also the somewhat intelligent kind, do better in a warmer climate.
There are good thermodynamic reasons for that. Almost all chemical reactions take place better at higher temperatures where molecules are more active, including the biochemical reactions in living things. That’s why plants stop growing in the winter, that’s why many animals hibernate, and that’s why so-called advanced animals – that is, warm blooded ones – evolved to metabolize food into heat.
A warmer earth would clearly sustain more life. Compare the abundant life of the Amazon jungle with the barely existing life at the South Pole.
The climate alarmists are left with attention-grabbing headlines such as claims that polar bears are dying out. That’s false. Or claiming that the Himalayan and Alps glaciers are melting out. That’s true but fails to provide the context that glaciation of mountains in middle latitudes is not the norm. It’s almost unique to the current cold spell.
But, you say, what about rising sea levels due to these melting glaciers? Well, the most pessimistic predictions by the doomsdayers call for a rise of a foot or two in sea levels over the next century. At 7,000 feet above sea level in the Colorado Rockies, I’m not feeling at risk. As for coastal cities, if the Netherlands can dike itself at two feet below sea level, they can surely add another foot or two to those dikes in the next hundred years.
New Orleans? Be diked or be gone. We won’t miss you. New Yorkers will love this change. Rather than them moving to Florida, Florida will move to them. Maybe Florida will bring along its favorable tax rates and its governor who doesn’t sexually assault all his female staffers.
A greener earth with a longer growing season would be a boon to agriculture. Extending growing seasons by a week or two would eradicate hunger like no United Nations program ever could, and without the waste, corruption and anti-semitism.
Of course, that’s important to you only if you care about poor hungry people. Many warmingites care more about conspicuously practicing their religion in a snazzy electric car to take them to their mountain chalet.
Speaking of mountain chalets, I’m always amused by the sanctimony of Colorado ski companies like Aspen Skiing Company that advertise how they’re abating global warming. They boast that their little ski patrol huts are heated with solar energy while they ignore the thousands of tons of carbon dioxide they spew into the air to generate electricity to drag private jetters in $2,000 jackets up a manicured snowhill so that they can slide back down.
These ski companies worship snow because they worship profits. Fine, but don’t expect our applause for that. It’s like physicians worshiping accidents and illness because that’s what keeps them in business, and then expecting the rest of us to congratulate them for such worship.
Let’s have an open debate. Do we want more winter or more summer? More warmth or more cold? More food or more starvation? More life or more ice?