Climate Change and archaeology
I'm finding myself out of step with Climate Change. I hate to be considered a climate chance denier but I think my archaeological background gives a different perspective on the subject.
This is the first time I have tried to articulate my position. Firstly, I believe that recycling and cutting down emissions are worthy of support but I think this is irrespective of Climate Change. We should be maker the world a cleaner more sustainable place in any case. So I'm not a burn coal and to hell with it type of chap.
But, as an archaeologist, it is clear that climate change is the norm - Chris Stringer in Homo Brittanicus shows that the British Isles have been made inhospitable to humans 5 times in the last million years by climate change. The last great climate change saw a 7 degree change in temperature in 15 years.
So, climate change is a normal part of the planetary cycle. And what seems strange to me is that the logic of the green position is to try and freeze our climate the way it is now. So those who say they love the planet, in a Gaiaesque viewpoint, are denying the very dynamism that makes the earth such a fantastic place it is a living, changing place and if we gain control of climate change we tame it if not kill it.
One influence is Foundation by Isaac Azimov which has an imagined central world called Terminus which is completely controlled by society, completely built over and in effect a dead planet? Another influence is Lovelock, who in one of his early books, said the worst thing for the world would be humans smart enough to control the planet and that if we managed that we are bound to fuck it up - the interactions being too complicated for humans to understand.
Another issue is that I gained some insight into Science when working at the Research Laboratory for Archaeology at Oxford, we were looking at reversals in the magnetic field. I seem to remember there was a so called Gothenburg Event which one scientist discovered, then it was corroborated by a host of others, until a definitive work proved it did not really exist it was just noise. The point being that when once identified, any result which would otherwise have been checked and doubled checked were not checked as they were validated by the original evidence. In other words the scientists were all jumping on a bandwagon. It is clear to me that the current situation really does not give a neutral scientific position, all the odds are in favour of Climate change.
To me it is manifest that even if we are absolutely sure that climate change is caused by modern industrial activity, we are not at all sure what the outcome will be - whether Gaia will right the situation, whether a new equilibrium will develop, whether the temperature will rise drop or stabilise.
Please be aware I'm not saying this means we do nothing - I'm saying that we should increase recycling, diversify energy resources, live on the planet in a sustainable way at the same time we should put our greatest efforts into providing clean drinking water, and reasonable standards of housing, nutrition and health care around the world - and we should leave Gaia to change the planet as she sees fit.
This is the first time I have tried to articulate my position. Firstly, I believe that recycling and cutting down emissions are worthy of support but I think this is irrespective of Climate Change. We should be maker the world a cleaner more sustainable place in any case. So I'm not a burn coal and to hell with it type of chap.
But, as an archaeologist, it is clear that climate change is the norm - Chris Stringer in Homo Brittanicus shows that the British Isles have been made inhospitable to humans 5 times in the last million years by climate change. The last great climate change saw a 7 degree change in temperature in 15 years.
So, climate change is a normal part of the planetary cycle. And what seems strange to me is that the logic of the green position is to try and freeze our climate the way it is now. So those who say they love the planet, in a Gaiaesque viewpoint, are denying the very dynamism that makes the earth such a fantastic place it is a living, changing place and if we gain control of climate change we tame it if not kill it.
One influence is Foundation by Isaac Azimov which has an imagined central world called Terminus which is completely controlled by society, completely built over and in effect a dead planet? Another influence is Lovelock, who in one of his early books, said the worst thing for the world would be humans smart enough to control the planet and that if we managed that we are bound to fuck it up - the interactions being too complicated for humans to understand.
Another issue is that I gained some insight into Science when working at the Research Laboratory for Archaeology at Oxford, we were looking at reversals in the magnetic field. I seem to remember there was a so called Gothenburg Event which one scientist discovered, then it was corroborated by a host of others, until a definitive work proved it did not really exist it was just noise. The point being that when once identified, any result which would otherwise have been checked and doubled checked were not checked as they were validated by the original evidence. In other words the scientists were all jumping on a bandwagon. It is clear to me that the current situation really does not give a neutral scientific position, all the odds are in favour of Climate change.
To me it is manifest that even if we are absolutely sure that climate change is caused by modern industrial activity, we are not at all sure what the outcome will be - whether Gaia will right the situation, whether a new equilibrium will develop, whether the temperature will rise drop or stabilise.
Please be aware I'm not saying this means we do nothing - I'm saying that we should increase recycling, diversify energy resources, live on the planet in a sustainable way at the same time we should put our greatest efforts into providing clean drinking water, and reasonable standards of housing, nutrition and health care around the world - and we should leave Gaia to change the planet as she sees fit.
Comments