[ExI] "Up against the warming zealots"...hmmm

spike spike66 at comcast.net
Tue Jul 24 04:27:26 UTC 2007

> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn
> However, there seems to be somewhat of a memeplex out there that
> includes not only modern green-consciousness, but also anti
> "progress", anti science and anti rational positions. Admitedly this
> is just conjecture on my part, but I feel like there's an
> anti-humanism that goes with the green movement, an assumption that
> things we do to improve the lot of humans through scientific
> investigation are immediately suspect, a kind of evil... Emlyn

Astute observations all.

Emlyn, the discussion on this topic seems to center around two questions:

1. Is global warming real?
2. Is it human made?

But this discussion ignores a third question, or rather assumes an answer:

3. Is global warming good?

Previously I have argued that in many ways it is good, but now I realize
this is very much an understatement.  If human population grows the way I
expect it will, global warming might be our salvation, it might save our
species.  We are after all a warm climate species, Africans that have
managed to spread everywhere.  

One of the side effects of global warming upon which most agree is longer
growing seasons.  We can easily envision a wetter planet where plants grow
better because of more CO2 in the air.  If we can imagine Earth with 30 to
50 billion inhabitants in place of our current paltry 6 to 7 billion, we
will desperately need to put all the available land to work making food for
all those humans.

As Emlyn as observed, progress is often seen as a kind of evil.  I see it as
a kind of righteousness.  The current exclusive focus on the down side of
global warming is a kind of evil.  

Consider for instance the losers in the global warming deal: penguins and
polar bears.  If human population does what I expect, these beasts would
long since have been devoured before the last ice disappears.  Or if not
devoured, then slain because they are carnivorous, and eat the same things
we eat, and are therefore competitors for a limited food supply.  

If we look at those humans that live in low lying countries such as
Bangladesh, we must consider the fact that as human populations grow, these
countries would need to import massive amounts of food anyway, so longer
growing seasons help them too.  Living elsewhere of course.

Regarding the first two questions above, we could construct orthogonal axes
dividing a thought-plane into quadrants.  If we add the third question on
another orthogonal axis, we divide space into octants.  I am definitely in
the half of space that is cheering for global warming.  As to the first two
questions, I am not sure they are true, but in both cases, I certainly hope


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list