You’ve heard again and again, “global warming due to human activities”. But what if it is all natural?
Natural vs Man-made
Now before you call me a flat-earth believer, I want to establish the basis of my claim. I want to say that, the term “man-made” and “natural” are not mutually exclusive. In fact, I consider “man-made” changes a part of nature.
Why do I say that? Because it is natural to say so.
According to the theory of evolution, humans evolved into our current form “naturally”. The process is a governed by the biological process of mutations that spanned across vast period of time. So there is nothing “unnatural” about humans as a species.
Taking this idea one step further, what makes all of our actions “unnatural”? If we are just product of natural selection, performing biological and chemical reactions according to what’s encoded in our genes. Humans causing other species to extinct? It is just part of natural selection. Humans themselves cause global warming and go extinct? It is also just part of natural selection.
Consider this hypothetical situation:
Dinosaurs, without the foresight of environmental consequences, decided that destroying forest would give them more space to build their own civilizations. They went extinct due to the effect of deforestation and subsequently global warming.
What would you call it? A “dinosaur-made” global warming, or a natural global warming? I would say both are valid statements, because dinosaurs are part the nature.
Bottom-line is, we as a species are governed by the same laws of physics, chemistry and biology as other species, there is nothing separating us from the rest of nature.
We are all part of the nature.
What Difference Does it Make?
Not much. Except we need to acknowledge the fact that “addressing the issue of global warming” has very little to saving the planet or the nature. The planet or the nature does not need our help. It will always exist and function as intended, governed by laws of natural sciences.
Too much CO2 in the atmosphere? Species who cannot handle excessive CO2 goes extinct and species who can handle them survive and pass on the genes.
Too much UV light reaching surface of the earth? Species who cannot handle excessive UV light goes extinct and species who can handle them survive and pass on the genes.
So what are we really trying to do here is just saving ourselves from extinction. That’s it, the natural desire for continuation of species.
[Update]
To put my point more directly:
Whatever we do to “save the earth or the environment”, they are not really “saving” the earth or the environment, because the earth and the environment don’t really care about humans. The nature does not differentiates hot vs cold, high CO2 concentration or low CO2 concentration, earth covered by lava or forest. What we call destructions or damages, are just natural processes by a highly intelligent species. All we are doing is making the earth more suitable for humans to live, that’s it.
[Update 2]
If you are still not convinced, here is another question to consider:
If humans have the ability to safely and easily move to another habitable planet, and we are able to raise all animals artificially on other planets, do you still care about the Earth?