Why worry?
---Michael Boskin, former chairman of the Bush administration's Council of Economic Advisors
qtd in: Newton, David E. Global Warming: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: Instructional Horizons, 1993.
There is skepticism regarding the presence of global warming in today's world and the extent of its effects on future climate. Not everyone agrees that this additional warming is due to man-made causes. They instead point out that the earth is naturally fickle, and that hot spells, along with warming trends, are normal occurrences in natural climate variation. At the center of controversy are the computer models on which climate forecasters largely depend. Skeptics continue to say that the models fail to simulate the present climate realistically. Indeed these models are like "dirty crystal balls," as Steven Schneider puts it (qtd. in Bernard 82), but one must reason: if these models are considered crude in relation to reality, then all the correlations seen thus far should, in theory, be ten times worse. And this is the case. There is a time lag between an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and the achievement of its full warming effect, leaving an additional, 'committed' amount of warming still to come, regardless of future emissions. Thus global warming could be much worse than many scientists currently foresee, and many responsible critics concede this point. Robert Balling, an Arizona State University climatologist and greenhouse skeptic, cautions, "Although a one-degree warming is much more probable, it is ludicrous to say that 5.5 degrees cannot happen" (Bernard 82). In light of this, Bernard adds, "We'd probably better hope that recent global temperature trends are a manifestation of the greenhouse effect [because] if they aren't, if there is something else at work, if some other phenomenon we haven't detected is warming our climate, then we're in real trouble" (13). If the enhanced greenhouse effect due to human activities has not begun already, as some skeptics contend, this means that when it does, it will start from an even higher treshold.
And so we are in 'real trouble'. Not only are scientists divided over the causes of global warming, but they also disagree about the impact that this phenomenon will have on the environment and what, if anything, we should do about it. Science offers us no 'quick fix' or magic solution. We face instead a problem of risk management. The way in which societies deal with this risk is both an economic and political problem, but let's not distance ourselves from this scenario. Climate variability affects many facets of human life. Departures from seasonal rhythms of climate have often provided the difference between feast and famine, wealth and poverty, health and disease, and even life and death, writes Easterling, chair of the National Resarch Council's Panel on Human Dimensions of Seasonal- to-Interannual Climate Variability (ix). The implications of climate change for human welfare is indeed pervasive, endangering the delicate ecosystems that surround us, the world of agriculture that feeds us, and, in reference to sea level rise, the very land on which the most densely populated areas of the world live. Not close enough for you? "Why should we worry about global warming," you may ask. Ask those of northeast China and the Korean Peninsula, who witnessed the summer rain and flooding that led to famine in some regions. Ask the people of Ghana, who, in July 1998 saw the heaviest rainfall in 30 years, with 20 deaths from flooding. Ask the World Cup skiers whose events in Austria were canceled due to record highs and a lack of snow. Ask Londoners, whose severe summer of 1998 heat wave and drought were part of its hottest summer since 1659. Ask those of the plains region in Argentina, whose Patagonia forest had one of its most active fire seasons in memory (Begley 26-7). Ask them. They will all agree that climate change due to global warming is not just an environmental issue, but a global issue, a human issue.