ECO-EVANGELICALS AND LATTER-DAY FLAT-EARTHERS HAVE IT WRONG…
(…because both act like two donkeys braying over one pile of hay)

We have no claims to either academic or scientific credentials or expertise about the subject of climate change, and global warming impacts which might derive from that. Our understanding of the subject comes only from having made some in depth research and reading about it over a decade ago…by browsing through piles of archives and journals from various disciplines having a bearing on the subject…geology, paleontology, archeology, oceanography, climatology, and so on, plus an array of ongoing articles, reports, and books, by an equal variety of experts from all those fields.

Our approach while doing so was to avoid as much as possible any pre-conceived notions about it, and with even greater difficulty, ignoring the strident cross-field chatter coming from both the Eco-Evangelicals and the Flat-Earthers, neither of whom in our view have contributed anything useful to our better comprehension of the subject.

What we’ve come away from all that gleaning and study during that time can be summarized as follows:

  • Our planet has a clear cyclical record of climate change since its creation some 4 billion years ago.
  • In the last million years alone it has gone through four (4) such cycles, from cooling to warming, with the cooling cycles being relatively short lasting, with the warming cycles being long lasting.
  • For most of that time period these cycles have had little or no connection to our human presence on this planet, either from the impact of our numbers or from our activities, until very recent times.
  • The impacts from these cooling and warming cycles are:
  1. During a cold cycle, the polar ice caps expand toward the equator, ocean levels drop extremely, the Temperate zones are thus compressed, or narrowed, and somewhat merged into the Sub-Tropical zones, plant, animal, and human species are then diminished in diversity and their proliferation restricted to what amounts to a “life boat” zone, allowing them to survive.
  2. During a warm cycle, as the ice caps retreat and shrink back toward the poles, the ocean levels rise up again, and the Temperate zones most favorable to plant, animal, and humans expand again, allowing these to renew their proliferation in diversity and numbers at a rapid pace. The Sub-Tropical zones correspondently also expand somewhat.
  3. The Equatorial zones however remain relatively constant regardless of these climatic cycles.

This cyclical process is driven by many factors having a very complex inter-relationship and interaction relating to…the Earth’s slightly elliptical rather circular orbit around the sun, its axial tilt, wobble, tectonic plate movements, volcanic activity, solar flare cycles, etc., much of it still not fully understood.

These are the broad impacts of what happens with these cycles of climate change. Where both the Eco-Evangelicals and the Flat-Earthers get it wrong is that both ignore that cyclical record. The Eco-Evangelicals insisting solely on making it an article of faith that only we humans are the cause of it all, while the Flat-Earthers simply deny that such cycles have anything to do with humans, if these exist at all.

The key take-away for us to better understand the subject and its related issues is this:

  • Climate change is a fact. It’s been part of the history of our planet.
  • Cold cycles have been short lasting, none lasting more than 100,000 years. Their onsets appear to be rapid and reach a maximum of intensity very quickly.
  • Warm cycles however are long lasting, none less than 100,000 years, and some even have lasted up to 300,000 years. Their onsets are slow, and progressively reach a maximum of intensity the same way.
  • We exist today in the most recent warming cycle which started up +/-50,000 years ago, which means, at best, there may be another 50,000 to go before the cycle reverses again.
  • The difference this time with this current warm cycle is that we humans are contributing a new factor to that warming process, and that contribution comes from both our numbers and our activities, the impacts of which seem to be to accelerate the rate at which it will reach its maximum intensity. Thus, the effect of that may in fact be shortening the time frame before the next cooling cycle returns, rather than otherwise.

In the meantime continuing with arguments and debates about how to stop a cyclical process over which we have no control or means of preventing, even if we reduce or eliminate our contributions to it, is a useless exercise. So to continue to talk in terms of preventing or halting the process is ridiculous, distorts our perceptions of what’s actually happening, and prevents us from focusing instead on our capabilities and resources to develop the best ways and means for us to adapt to the impacts that are sure to result from it. 

We’ve attached a number of annexes to explain how we’ve arrived at this understanding of the subject. How correct it is or not, we can’t say, but it seems to be a much more reasonable basis for it than what is otherwise being touted about the matter.

CENTURION

ANNEX I