Forget Global Warming And Find Inner Harmony
Improve the world because you are inspired, NOT because you are afraid.
Getting Signals Uncrossed
From a scientific point of view, the smartest question we can ask about global warming is:
“Given the extremely long time spans and astronomically large magnitudes of natural climate-changing forces, how do we separate the human effect, in order to detect it, so that we might prove that it even exists?”
A scientist might ask the question like this:
“How do we separate the human signal from the natural signal?”
The correct answer, I am convinced, is: “We really can’t.”
When all evidence is weighed strictly, according to the highest standards of rational (NOT emotional) proof, then we cannot separate a human-caused climate signal from a naturally-caused climate signal. There is NO single source of compelling proof and NO body of converging evidence so unequivocally strong that scientists are justified in claiming a destructive human-caused effect on Earth’s climate. What primarily guides widespread, popular opinions on global warming are highly successful ad campaigns fueled by fears about what MIGHT happen, in the midst of considerable uncertainty about what actually WILL happen.
We humans like to think that our species is powerful enough to trigger a climate catastrophe, but the single most outstanding realization here is that human beings still cannot hold a match to the enormous forces of Nature. These immensely greater forces are still what dominate and ultimately control atmospheric conditions on our cozy, blue planet.
Facing The Really Important Questions
- Are humans slobs?
- Are humans careless?
- Are humans insensitive in critical situations?
- Are humans undisciplined and disrespectful?
I suggest that the answer to all these questions is a resounding, “YES”.
We are more justified in getting emotional about questions such as these, because such questions relate to issues of good, truth, excellence, and beauty. Such questions rely on human measures that exceed numerical representation. If we focus on such questions within their proper domains, therefore, BEFORE misdirecting our energies of answering them onto the scientific domain, then we will more honestly address the real problems of preserving our well-being on this planet.
We are in a critical phase of civilization where we need to raise such questions to positions of the highest importance. These are questions that speak to individual character and integrity. These are questions that further speak to societal standards and commitments as stewards of the world.
Excellence, integrity, high standards, and good stewardship arise from a deep sense of elegance in how things move and harmonize. In other words, our aesthetic sense guides us in the most important matters of life. If more of us attune to this aesthetic sense, giving it the highest priority, then many problems cease, because we have eradicated them at their root sources.
We, thus, create cleaner technologies, because cleaner technologies look prettier, and cleaner technologies smell better. We plant more flowers, preserve more land, reproduce fewer humans, and build less intrusive structures, because the resulting landscapes inspire us and give us places to commune with the cosmos.
If more of us would nurture positive sensations, appreciate elegance in design, practice unwavering respect for others, and behave with an overriding commitment to excellence, then the issue of human-caused global warming would simply go away. All the things that popular arguments blame for global warming would cease because of deeper, aesthetic reasons. More of us, then, could get on with living, out of inspiration, NOT out of fear.