Three years ago when world leaders met to negotiate an international agreement on confronting climate change one of the most difficult points upon which to reach agreement was what some have suggested calling the Doomsday Thermometer Reading. After much political jousting the number was set at 2 degrees Celsius above the level that existed prior to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, about 1800. Beyond this level it was concluded potential catastrophe lay. But small island states such as the Maldives and Mauritius as well as some developing countries such as Ethiopia and Columbia pushed back saying that their countries would be devastated—and some would be under water—well before 2 degrees of additional warming was reached. They wanted a lower level, 1.5 degrees Celsius. The compromise reached was to endorse both numbers. The Paris Agreement calls for “holding” warming below two degrees while “pursuing” efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees.
Last week, the United Nations scientific advisory board (referred to as the I.P.C.C., the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) delivered an assessment of these numbers. It found that the effect of even 1.5 degrees worth of warming will probably be disastrous—as reported by an article in the New Yorker of October 22, 2018—with consequences including but not limited to: “the loss of most of the world’s coral reefs, the displacement of millions of people by sea- level rise, and a decline in global crop yields.” And which is now widely understood as the barest beginnings of the calamitous, disastrous, overpowering, crushing existential threat that uncontrolled climate change represents to humanity. But of course the Trump administration is going in the opposite direction thereby directly threatening this country, the world community and the future of humanity on this planet.
As the article continues: “Though the Administration often seems incapable of systematic action, it has spent the past eighteen months systematically targeting rules aimed at curbing greenhouse gas-emissions. One of these rules, which required greater fuel efficiency for cars and trucks, would have reduced CO2 emissions by an estimated six billion tons over the lifetime of the affected vehicles. In a recent finding intended to justify the rollback, the Administration predicted that, by the end of this century, global temperatures will have risen by almost four degrees Celsius (nearly seven degrees Fahrenheit). In this context, the Administration argued, why would anyone care about a mere six billion tons? Come the apocalypse, it seems, we all want to be driving S.U.V.s.” This level, plus 4 degrees, is nearing possible extinction levels. This is not fiddling while Rome is burning; this is setting fire to your own fiddle and starting the fires yourself. It constitutes the Administration giving up and abandoning any hope of saving humanity. It is like saying let the grandchildren burn if they can’t save themselves—which by the end of the century would not be possible—let’s enjoy ourselves while we can and drive around in big S.U.V.s spewing even more poisonous carbon into the air.
Any Administration that truly thinks like this should not be allowed to hold office. If in office, they should be removed and they certainly under no circumstance should be continued in office.
Here follows a few thoughts from our Founders:
“Government is nothing more than the combined force of Society, or the united power of the multitude for peace, order, safety, good and happiness of the people.”
John Adams, 1772
“The essence of Government is power and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.”
James Madison, 1829
“Tyranny can scarcely be practiced upon a virtuous and wise people.”
John Adams, 1796
“I feel anxious for the fate of our monarchy, or democracy, or whatever is to take place. I soon get lost in a labyrinth of perplexities; but, whatever occurs, may justice and righteousness be the stability of our times, and order arise out of confusion. Great difficulties may be surmounted by patience and perseverance.”
Abigail Adams, 1775
John Jay