Pinky Rants: Climate Change
A Rant About Climate Change
“When people feel insulted or disgusted, they generally do something about it, such as whacking each other over the head, or voting…If climate change were caused by a brutal dictator or an evil empire, the war on warming would be this nation’s top priority…Or if it were caused by gay sex, millions of protesters would be massing in the streets.” ~Daniel Gilbert
In addition to naturism, I’m interested in a lot of other things. Such as the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that are quickly (not slowly) destroying the planet Earth.
Now, I love summer and warm weather, and I’m just as eager as the next nudist to leave the clothing in my dresser and run to the nearest nude beach or club on the first decent spring day. (Sunshine!! Spring! Flowers! Sunscreen! I get very excited.) But I’m more worried than excited this year. With all the record-breaking hot temperatures all over the U.S. (80 degrees, Chicago, in March?!), you may have been wondering like I have…Is it just part of the natural weather cycles? Or is it…dun dun dun…GLOBAL WARMING ?
Just concerning the March heat waves, that question will take several months of research and analyzing to answer. But global warming, more accurately known as climate change, is NOT just a natural weather cycle. It’s happening, it’s human-caused and we need to do something about it. Yet according to a Gallup poll, only 34% of Americans agree that it’s a serious issue needing immediate action. Have you witnessed or read about scientists or anyone debating the occurrence of climate change? And debating whether it’s caused by humans or not? Newsflash: It’s not a debate. The world’s leading scientists have already gotten together, did their studies and research, and confirmed that. In fact, according to the book Think by attorney / legal analyst Lisa Bloom, the UN brought them together 4 times since 1990 to confirm that it’s a human-caused phenomenon taking effect right now.
The National Geographic Society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the EPA, NASA, NOAA, all agree that the effects of climate change can already be seen in rising ocean levels and melting glaciers. The IPCC is predicting disastrous effects (some of which have already started) including flooding, extreme tropical cyclones, droughts, hot and cold temperature extremes, and an overall temperature increase of 2.5 to 10 degrees F, all likely to occur in the 21st century. Millions of people will be forced to relocate or flooded out of their homes and villages, and yet people in the Pacific island nations for example, will have nowhere to go.
Meanwhile, apathy seems to rule the American population as well as the U.S. government. The United Nations has long been criticizing the U.S. because “it has not adopted a comprehensive domestic program for reducing its own greenhouse gas emissions,” according to the NY Times article, “Global Warming & Climate Change.” The last big climate change bill didn’t make it past the Senate.
Now I know that there are plenty of other issues to worry about in the world like poverty, slavery, FGM. But who cares about the slaves and the poor people if they’re going to die in a massive cyclone in the near future? If we can no longer live on this planet, I (like Bloom) argue that all the other issues become secondary. Including naturism, if we have no planet to go naked on.
Though climate change is a huge global threat, elected officials are sitting on their hands. Thankfully, we can combat it on an individual level. So what can we do? One of the best actions is to switch to public transportation or a fuel-efficient car like a hybrid, which saves money (as much as $18,000 in the long run) as well as the planet. I’ve also never seen a better reason for going vegetarian or just eating less meat. Scientists are still trying to figure out exactly how much of an impact agriculture has on climate change, but one IPCC author estimates that industrial farming accounts for 17-32% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. Another recent study says we need to cut meat consumption in half by 2050 to avoid climate catastrophe. This is not hard to believe when you consider all the effects of slaughter, deforestation for grazing, and toxic animal methane gas/waste. In the National Geographic documentary, “6 Degrees Could Change The World,” one scientist calculated the carbon footprint of a cheeseburger and found that the entire production of one burger produces 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent! Beef and pork in particular have a high carbon footprint, so eating more chicken or fish could also help cut personal carbon emissions. See resources below for more ways to cut back emissions and slow down climate change.
So, what do you think about global warming / climate change? Do you think it’s a problem? Are you taking action and if so, how?
What is Global Warming? (Note: Global warming refers to the Earth warming up, but “climate change” is now the preferred name since some parts of the Earth will get hotter while other parts get colder.)
More Ways You Can Help Reduce Greenhouse Gases
- EPA lists ways for at home, on the road, at work & at school
- The Nature Conservancy has a simple list
- The Union of Concernced Scientists also lists what you can do
See comparison images of the effects of climate change from space like the one above on NASA’s website.
About the Author (Author Profile)Author of Felicity's Blog. Co-founder of Young Naturists America. 3rd-generation nudie. Avid reader. Feminist. 70% vegan, 30% vegetarian. When I'm not busy eating, I'm writing about naturism, censorship, topfree equality, body image and other fun topics. I like feedback, so plz leave a comment when you've got something to say!
Sorry, but not all climate change is man made. If that was true, Mt. Everest's ice caps would be disappearing, yet they're increasing. A lot of these 'scientific' reports say global warming, but the Earth is always warming and cooling. Climate change is natural (more natural than nudism). You can't stop it, and these cutbacks are becoming harmful. I'm 14, and I recently job shadowed a mechanical engineer who designs locomotives. His company had to schedule a meeting to upgrade their engines, again, because of EPA regulations. The funny thing is that this company is famous for their green locomotives. Consider the fact that you are doing more damage by strangling the entire world with regulations that are trying to fight the natural behavior of this planet. Humans will be gone in a couple of million years from the Earth getting too hot, but when that happens, you can't say it's the factories of Detroit and East Saint Louis. It's natural for the Earth to warm and cool (and it appears that it's beginning to cool).
Sorry, but most of the world's scientists say it's NOT just the Earth naturally heating & cooling. Yes it's true that the Earth goes through such cycles, but that's not what's happening here.
I also believe strongly in these causes. I ride a bicycle to work everyday, even in snow. When I do drive I use a small car, I own a small house and continue to insulate more each year. I avoid red meats, and I am planting a garden out back. I am always looking for ways to use less or do more with less. A note on the NASCAR comment above: Most race cars (of any kind) use no gasoline at all. Most use alcohol of some variation. Still consuming fuel and energy but not petrol based and much less emissions. And many innovations that improve the cars we drive come from racing, so I don't believe this is a worthwhile target.
That is awesome jb! Great steps to reduce our carbon footprints. I wish more people would live that way. And I did not know that about race cars, good to know! I'm glad they're using cleaner fuel and making innovations.
Oil, yes, we're definitely going to run out of cheap oil. Food: uh-uh. All we need is a better food system with less waste. 1 billion people are malnourished, but 1/3 of the world's food is thrown away.
Tom: You're right, but it's going to take a lot more than individual effort to really bring about substantial change. K: Ohh what's the Leo Decaprio and Al Gore film?? Drawing a blank Unconditional truth?? Scary shit!! Joe:'Inconvenient Truth.' I think the best way to bring down total carbon emissions fast is to concentrate on the biggest producers. Nascar races burn up thoudsnds of gallons of gasoline per race, and they don't even go anywhere. How about boycotting their sponsors? Road-trucks use roughly 25 times as much fuel as freight-trains as a function of net weight; let's encourage rail transport for long-distance shipping. The same goes for people traveling; planes are far less efficient than trains, besides being highly unpleasant. Folks used to love a train-ride. Now they dread a flight. These are some ways that a big difference could be made quickly, along with encouraging the development of green technologies, and of course, energy efficiency in our own personal lives. Mike: Partisan politicians and supporters are ignoring obvious evidence. I know one. He is the boyfriend of a very good friend of my wife. We will no longer meet socially because of him. He also refuses to concede that suppy side economics doesn't work. My Response: Tom, if everyone thought that way- that individual actions won't make a difference then yeah it will take a lot more. But if we sit around waiting for officials to make substantial change, we're holding our breath. Collectively I think we can make big changes ourselves! It always starts with 1, then 2, and grows. It's good time to take matters into our own hands. Joe, yeah I've never been a fan of Nascar, however they can continue their races to nowhere if they'd switch to hybrid cars! haha. We should challenge them to develop a strong hyrbid car for the races! & I totally agree with you - using efficient clean public transportation is a great way to reduce emissions. U.S. public transportation is not as good as in other countries, but if people choose it over driving cars it makes a difference.
I do not believe that Planet Earth can sustain 7 billion people under any circumstance. We will run out of food and oil.
@James Hays Stevenson That is highly unlikely. Actually the odds of running out of food for a population in a constant boom (which we are not in) in perpetuity is nearing toward zero. Our technology is starting a zero-marginal-cost phenomenon, which is ironically breaking the very economic system that gave rise to it, capitalism. We are on the verge of encountering a problem no species has ever encountered near zero scarcity. This is in addition to the fact that the world's collective (i.e. not the 1% earnings) wages and wealth has been increasing overall (Global Poverty is in record lows). This coupled with the westernization of the world is causing, little by little, subtle population growth stabilities (by region), or actually deficit (in the very interesting case of Japan [which is only unique to Japan do to the draconian Japanese immigration system, otherwise almost all western nations would be in population decline]). The human population growth is beginning to slow (contrary to most doomsday predictions). The only areas of significant population growth are areas typically seen as impoverished (and again, noting the trend toward the global elimination of poverty). Hence the reason that Hispanic-Americans have a vastly higher population growth rate in the US and ditto for Middle-Eastern Europeans in Europe.
In essence the combination of easy food acquisition, greater energy efficiency (and diversity), Global Wealth increases, and overall increases to stability (both politically and populationwise) are causing this doomsay prediction to quickly fall short of likelyhood (at this point it would take a major catastrophe [which ironically would likely kill a lot of people] for this trend to cease [not that I think such things are unlikely however]).
For the more on topic comment, I personally feel that regardless of the data on global climate change [which is quite suspect even without the obvious donations by big oil, and the political elite (in opposition to big oil)], we should focus our attention to the colonization and terraforming of mars. There is simply no mathematical reason not to decrease our odds of catastrophe by having an alternate homeworld in the event of disaster. The reality is that soon Earth will cease to be livable in (in around a couple million years or so there will be a very pronounced warming trend that is unlikely to stop [this is of course without calculating mankind's impact]). If that were not enough, it is highly likely that the spinoff technology colonizing and terraforming mars will aid global-climate-change-reducing technology (not earlier that we have to do this anyway). All in all, I recommend we increase our scientific-economic growth while risking higher emissions, in order to decrease our existential risk (large asteroid, rogue planet, really crappy earthquake etc.). Finally, acquiring mars as a homeworld will not only increase our exploration of space, but will allow us to start colonizing other worlds (like Europa or Ganymede perhaps?).
In short, it is highly beneficial to continue our economic and scientific advancement as is (or even accelerating them) while being ESPECIALLY alert for political threats (as at the moment that is one of the biggest risks that we have little to no risk mitigation on). We should be especially concerned with the potential benefits and risks of technologies like Quantum Computing, CRISPR, and Additive Manufacturing (3D Printing). These type of technologies could cause massive devastation, or massive Global Empowerment, and hence should be given a great deal more scrutiny than the current pundits do now IMO.