Posted by: Jose | May 2, 2007

Let’s talk Earth

We have been reading and hearing continuously these days about the degradation of the climatic conditions in our planet. Scientists warn states that continuous dirtying of the atmosphere will result in an irreversible status where the Earth might afford the worst habitable conditions for human beings and the rest of living organisms.

And this has made me think whether everything is true or deceitful in this rotating mass where we have been allowed to coexist.

Why can it not be that old theories of glaciation, of the Ice Age, be true? Let us imagine for a moment that conditions on the Earth trillions of years ago were the same as they are today. Warming of the planet ended most of life on it, the seas grew as a consequence of full thaw of the ice, the air became unbreathable. The Earth was practically dead.

Once the human beings disappeared,  contamination disappeared with them giving way to a period of recovery that lasted again trillions of years. The micro-organisms that could save themselves because of their innate conditions of resilience started again what scientists call evolution. This does not mean to say that creation did not exist, but it might have started aeons ago, cycles of death and evolution destroying and recreating life respectively. A game where living beings played an endless role, emerging from simple cells up to exceptional intelligent aptitudes. And again that very same intelligence being responsible for another destructive period.

So we should not be worried that our planet’s life be destroyed, because there again the history will repeat and everything will re-start as it did on the last cycle of its existence. Or will it?

The human being considered the most intelligent of the living beings is not capable of discerning what is true and what is not. We keep carrying on our existence as though nothing were going to happen, in such a state of dumbfoundedness that we are not able to react before the awful existence that looms in the not too distant future. We might not suffer from it because we might already be dead by then, but our descendants will and it is our unavoidable duty to watch over their future now and not let them try to solve the problem when it will not be easily solvable.

I cannot stop thinking about it.

Posted in Environment, Human beings

« The Power of Unions
Government : central or decentralised? »

Responses

Google “Gaia Theory”, Jose, and you can start thinking about that too !

By: Richard on May 2, 2007
at 9:49 pm

I’ve given thought to this recently too Jose and an oceanographer friend here in Halifax and I have had related discussions regarding human extinction and the inevitability of life on earth. What conceit to think that earth and life will end with our extinction. We are much more insignificant than we give our selves credit for.
Without question though, we must not make it worse for the limited number of future generations left. That is our responsibility.

I often say to friends taking highly competitive auditions for professional orchestras. You’ve already got enough to deal with, preconceived ideas from the panel, unfamiliar surroundings, numerous competitors, difficult music to perform, etc, why shoot yourself in the foot by getting nervous about the scenario.

This is where I see the cultural hesitancy on the global warming issue. We already know how screwed we are, and we’re too scared to wise up and do the practical things that need to be done, like living within our means as a species.

By: 1loneranger on May 2, 2007
at 10:32 pm

Indeed, 1loneranger, it is so simple as that. It is very simple to start acting for Nature and forget old habits that have eventually damaged it. It’ll mean not a lower standard in the quality of our lives but a different one, if we are brave enough to undertake the individual mission of, at least, trying to leave a better planet for the future generations.

The Gaia theory, Richard, or hypothesis:

quote
The Gaia hypothesis is an ecological hypothesis that proposes that living and nonliving parts of the earth are viewed as a complex interacting system that can be thought of as a single organism. Named after the Greek earth goddess, this hypothesis postulates that all living things have a regulatory effect on the Earth’s environment that promotes life overall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_theory_%28science%29
unquote

The contents of the Earth, Richard, but also the whole of the Earth. There are theories for all tastes, my favourite one is “balance”, if there is no balance the Earth will, so to speak, wobble and its translations and rotations will be affected by differences in gravity which in turn will affect the perfect equilibrium of everything.

By: Jose on May 3, 2007
at 5:46 am

We see the effects the attacks on the ozone layer have ended up in, how the scientists have ultimately blown the siren to alert us all of its consequences.

Unfortunately there is something we haven’t given our attention to and that is the core of the Earth. The extraction of the energetical resources by the milllions of tons must, in my opinion, have affected the mass of the planet. The movements of the tectonic plates affect in a large measure the tides and these movements will doubtless be affected by the increase of the weight of the sea water as a consequence of thaw in cold regions.

As I say the balance being harmed it isn’t necessary to be a genius to fear the consequences.

By: Jose on May 3, 2007
at 5:55 am

Jose, normally I am with you in the areas under discussion.
Don’t fancy your latest though.
Give us a source to back up that theory and let us see.
You mention ‘balance’ and that is exactly why we have a non-starter.

By: Boldscot on May 3, 2007
at 10:42 pm

Sorry, to be specific I mean about :

‘The extraction of the energetical resources by the milllions of tons must, in my opinion, have affected the mass of the planet’

By: Boldscot on May 3, 2007
at 10:46 pm

Thank you Boldscot.

My idea about balance, Boldscot, includes everything that should be normally left as Nature by logical means processes the cycles of life and death.

I mean oil that is thought to be the product of natural deterioration for millions of years and which is assumed to be part of the process of those cycles, if extracted by the quantities that it actually is, could - always in my opinion - affect the natural processes taking place in the core of the planet.

I consider the enormous “voids” left by the extraction of oil might give way to internal displacements affecting the mass and, in consequence, the gravity of the Earth, its weight unbalancing and provoking the wobbling I mentioned above.

A human trait is accept new technologies prima facie without further consideration of the consequences of its continued use. It happened with tetraethyl lead additive to petrol which helped to improve car performances but that has affected considerably our health.

In actual fact we are quite ignorant of natural processes inside the planet and that is a real handicap in our activities where Nature is involved.

By: Jose on May 4, 2007
at 4:58 am

I’m feeling you Jose. Something’s gotta ‘give’ someday. My first thought would be that we’d have to extract a LOT more of that old organic juice, but who knows? It could only take a little nudge to release a plate that’s been locked in place for millennia.
And yes, why base our important technologies on face value mentality? That gets us humans into trouble every time.
It is part of the Bigger, better, faster.. NOW! (TM.) theory. ;)

By: 1loneranger on May 4, 2007
at 2:04 pm

It could be that man [?] cab cause earthquakes and even tsunamis by exploring for oil with high-powered sonar in areas where great quantities of undersea oil has already been removed.

It really could take just a little nudge.

I blogged about this a long time ago, asking a lot of questions which never got anwers … but this post may still be interesting

http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/2004/12/what-caused-killer-tsunami.html

By: Winter Patriot on May 5, 2007
at 6:25 am

Answers. We seek answers to these questions but the fact is that, as Bill Bryson explains in his book “A short history of nearly everything”, and I quote textually: “We know amazingly little about what happens beneath our feet. It is fairly remarkable to think that Ford has been building cars and Nobel committees awarding prizes for longer than we have known that the Earth has a core”. He adds: ” ‘Strange as it may seem,’ wrote Richard Feynman, ‘we understand the distribution of matter in the interior of the sun far better than we understand the interior of the earth’”.

Funny, isn’t it?, that we don’t know what happens below where we set our feet. That we have not reassured ourselves where we tread and if our steps are safe enough to walk. We have a problem of safety that our scientists have not cared to find out about, instead they have directed their eyes up to the space. I find this ironic, I do.

I recommend the reading of this book (ISBN 0-552-15174-2), site: http://www.booksattransworld.co.uk/billbryson.

Theories are that

By: Jose on May 5, 2007
at 10:02 am

it cut off, sorry.

Theories are that continents are continuously moving, that the level of sea water may be increased by 4.5 to 6 meters. This means considerably more weight and in consequence more problems at the bottom of the seas.

As you say in your blog, Winter Patriot, we need answers, but it appears nobody is still qualified to give them.

By: Jose on May 5, 2007
at 10:07 am

Good blog, Jose.

I usually read this blog, but it’s the first time I write in.

Just to call your attention about the tectonic plates theory. Not only borders of tectonic plates can produce earthquakes. Just have a look to the website at bottom of this post, and, perhaps, you will learn something new.

Perhaps some of you have heard something about New Madrid, MO. If you have heard nothing about, I advance you there is fault there, and no tectonic plate border. That makes me consider again the exposed theory.

http://hsv.com/genlintr/newmadrd/

By: Pedallingman on May 6, 2007
at 11:23 am

Thank you, Pedallingman. And thanks for the link.

Welcome to the blog.

By: Jose on May 7, 2007
at 12:01 pm

Jose-
Reading in Smithsonian mag. today about Cajun country (louisiana), the wetlands there are supposedly sinking due to oil and gas extraction.
How do you like them apples?

By: 1loneranger on May 7, 2007
at 11:09 pm

Pretty good, I wonder how Cajun people will feel about it.

By: Jose on May 8, 2007
at 5:01 am

Leave a response






Your response:

Categories