The Fire Next Time?

 

As temperatures rise,

     the climate changes;

Dry trees - a spark,

     a match, lightning -

poof - gone.

 

These past five years have seen record-breaking atmospheric temperatures, drought, and extreme weather fluctuations. Here in San Diego County, increased temperatures were accompanied by high humidity and a record seven thunderstorms that occurred through July, August and September of 2003. Summer rain was essentially unknown for the area in previous years. Alpine and Cuyamaca sweltered through heat equaling the hottest previous years, while Borrego Springs and El Cajon set new all-time record highs. Moreover, the previous winter, between December and March, temperatures all over the world were higher than previously recorded for the same places and dates. Although the media and the general public express astonishment at the multitudes of record-breaking temperatures, scientists familiar with the phenomenon of global warming predicted these effects long ago and expect weather patterns to continue to worsen each year. Thus, while weather fluctuations are by their nature considerable, we can expect a continuous upward trend: hotter, drier, more humid and more erratic.

Global warming is affecting conditions worldwide. The same Sunday in September, 2003 that we in San Diego felt record highs, Britain experienced its hottest day on record, breaking 100º F in several parts of the country for the first time. Accurate records have been kept in England for 130 years, and Cheltenham in central England had held the previous record, 2ºF lower. In Northern France and Switzerland, melting alpine glaciers created avalanches that caused tremendous loss to life and property. Throughout Italy, Spain, Portugal and Southern France, temperatures approached 115ºF. This excruciating heat, causing increased rates of evaporation and accompanied by a severe lack of rain, caused devastating fires in all of these countries. Wild fires devoured much of the continent's woodlands, an enormous and essentially irreversible environmental loss. In Portugal, 150 fires simultaneously raged out of control in 15 of the 18 Portuguese districts, and the government, unable to cope with these conflagrations, was forced to call on Spain for help.

Despite the overwhelming evidence that global warming is becoming an increasingly grave threat to the environment, few people in the United States seem to make the connection between recent atrocious weather patterns and human-induced global warming. Heat and drought-driven conditions were blamed for thousands of human deaths throughout Europe, but Americans seem to have failed to make the connection to fossil fuel consumption and industrial activities. In France alone over 20,000 people have died from the heat wave, prompting Pope John Paul II to urge Catholics to pray for rain. "I invite all to join in my prayers for the victims of this calamity, and I exhort all to raise to the Lord fervent entreaties so that He may grant the relief of rain to the thirsty Earth" he said. These words were spoken for the benefit of pilgrims and tourists at the papal palace in lakeside Casel Gandolfe where the Pope had retreated to escape the heat of Rome. Unfortunately, just as the Bush administration in the U.S. has chosen to ignore the overwhelming scientific evidence that indicates man's responsibility for global warming, the Pope neglected to mention the most probable cause of this catastrophic heat. Instead, he implied that prayer was the solution to what might appear to believers as a natural heat wave. Because of their unrelenting policies concerning birth control, ignorant men such as the Pope and our U.S. President can be considered more responsible for global warming than anyone else on Earth.

The other morning, I overtook a young biker while commuting from my home in Encinitas to work at UCSD. Dave seemed friendly enough, and as we biked through the Torrey Pines State Park, he told me he had been biking nearly a month, having come from Seattle. His destination was the Mexican boarder. I was duly impressed and said so. After the exchange of several more niceties, Dave began telling me of his unwavering religious faith which he seemed to want fervently to discuss. After expressing my disinterest in the subject, he asked me what issues I considered more interesting and important. I told him that I was very concerned about environmental issues, particularly about global warming and species extinction. "Global warming?" he asked credulously. "You mean you believe that stuff?" I responded, "We're talking about science now, not religion. I don't just BELIEVE it, I KNOW it." Seeing that my statement had elicited a questioning frown, I continued. "Global warming is scientifically documented, and the causes are also clear: we humans are directly responsible." Further conversation revealed that Dave was duped by President Bush's uninformed statements asserting that global warming is just a hypothesis. Bush has consistently maintained that global warming is merely a possibility that needs to be researched before we should be concerned and before any action should be taken.

Dave's statement reminded me of an e-mail I had recently received from someone unknown to me. The sender, who did not reveal his identity but referred to himself as "Jimbo", had read some of my essays and wanted to pass on to me his more optimistic point of view. His e‑mail began: "Good News! Global warming is due to variations in solar output, not to human consumption of fossil fuels." Jimbo provided a web address that was supposed to document this claim. I went to this website and began to read. It started by saying "Scientists have been proven wrong." Immediately I was suspicious; anyone who would write "Scientists have been proven wrong" is not likely to be a scientist! Upon reading further, I learned that the author was not claiming to be able to disprove the human origin of global warming but instead was merely presenting an alternative postulate. He or she wanted to present the view that we humans might not be at fault. However, the writer was not aware of the extensive data showing that variations in solar output cannot account for global warming. It became clear that this optimistic but unrealistic writer lacked the expertise to convincingly argue his or her view.

I considered exposure to this website important for one primary reason - it pointed out the danger resulting from the fact that anyone can create a website and say anything, regardless of their qualifications, and regardless of how inaccurate their claims may be. The availability of fallacious or misleading websites serves to confuse the unsuspecting reader who may not be in a position to evaluate the experimental evidence. The presentation of inaccurate arguments on the web, in the media, or even in conversation by some persuasive ignoramus, or an individual with a vested interest in a specific viewpoint, can be highly detrimental to the public's recognition of the truth.

According to Dr. Ralph Cicerone, Professor of Earth Science and Chancellor at the University of California, Irvine, an expert on the Greenhouse effect, global warming is due largely to carbon dioxide and methane production resulting from human activities. The increased radiation entering the Earth's atmosphere due to ozone depletion may also contribute to this phenomenon. This is because it is the interaction of greenhouse gases with solar radiation that is causing the atmospheric rise in temperature. Dr. Cicerone and other experts have concluded that our activities have caused an overall increase in atmospheric temperature of nearly 2ºF since 1980. Extrapolating this figure into the future, we can anticipate that temperatures will increase at least 10ºF before the end of the century. However, recognizing that our carbon dioxide emissions are increasing each year and that the Earth's dwindling glaciers and ice caps currently absorb most of the heat we produce, the actual temperature increases are expected to be much greater in the future!

Faced with such prospects, the populations of most developed countries in Europe and Asia are deeply concerned about our environment and what we are doing to it. Over 100 countries have signed the Global Warming Accord although the United States was conspicuously unrepresented. Why do so many Americans accept the words of writers and speakers who lack familiarity with the scientific method over those of the experts when the citizens of most other developed countries are painfully aware? The answer may be related to the contents of an article by Nicholas D. Kristof entitled "Believe it or Not," which was published in the August 15, 2003 issue of the New York Times.

Mr. Kristof cites a survey revealing that Americans are three times as likely to believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus (83%) as in evolution (28%) although this is not true of any other industrialized country with the possible exception of South Korea. Further, Americans believe (58% to 40%) that it is necessary to believe in God to be moral even though the majority of people in every other developed country overwhelmingly believe that this is not necessary. In France, for example, only 13% agree with the U.S. view. It appears that Americans, in contrast to the citizens of all other developed countries, are becoming less intellectual and more mystical!

Mr. Kristof concludes his article by noting that a distressing gulf is arising not only between America and the rest of the world, but also between American intellectuals and the country's religious believers. He jokingly cites a T-shirt slogan: "So many right-wing Christians, so few lions" and attributes the outcome of the 2000 Presidential election to the confusion of religious Americans who may have believed that George W. Bush was God's choice, a belief professed by Bush himself. Anyone who believed this at the time of the election must now question that belief if they accept the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Those that assume the Christian tenet that the wealthy should share with the poor must also question the wisdom of a national policy based on greed.

What will be required to alert the misled flocks of American sheep? How can they be made to recognize the perils that lie ahead if we do not overcome denial and face the consequences of our government's disregard for environmental protection? The answer is plain and simple: "THE FIRE NEXT TIME". Perhaps the Bible was not far off in predicting that the world will end in flames. "And God gave Noah the rainbow sign. No more water; the fire next time."

Unfortunately, NEXT TIME may not be far off. The fires in the Western United States and Southern Europe portend a new era of human induced catastrophes. The forests and wildlife that the human populations have not yet destroyed for purposes of exploitation or out of carelessness will soon be destroyed by drought, heat and fire if we don't have the foresight to take an immediate preventative approach.