|
|
Global warming has left me coldI want to correct our terminology: It is no longer "global warming" since 49 states have snow on the ground in mid-February. It is "climate change," and the snow is the result of the earth warming. Does that logic bother you? I was taught to mistrust and dismiss double-talk when I was growing up in Oklahoma. I think we should still do so. Rural people are not the most sophisticated in our society but we deal with reality. The farmers have fed us year in and year out in spite of major shifts in the weather. Now we are being told that our agrarian and industrial activity is heating up the planet and dire results will come if we don't reverse course. I am a technocrat in that I believe science is our hope for a better life, but I find a major contradiction in this science and suspect that it is more the politics of manipulation than the science of meteorology. Let's be realistic about the weather as we know it. In the 20th century--the one that supposedly set global warming in motion--we saw extremes in weather across the farm-belt of the United States. The 1930s had some of the coldest and hottest days on record. The droughts were apocalyptic. Much of the rural population of the Plains was driven out by economic and physical stress. What did we do to cause that? My family lived in a shack with an outhouse and stopped driving their car because they had no money to buy gas. The 1950s had another drought in the Plains and 1980 was the one I remember most, with summer heat that scorched anything standing. The Upper Midwest always has cold winters, but the variability of liquid and solid precipitation year to year was also extreme. Right now we'd like to see some "global drying" so the crops can get planted on time. I have hung around meteorologists since my days at WKY-TV in Oklahoma City in the 1970s and I find them to be bright and determined people. Literally everyone who is into the science of weather is very skeptical of man-made global warming. Most say there is not enough real data to show a trend or cycle and others say there are so many factors that influence storms and drought that we cannot pinpoint the cause of anything. If a weathercast can't tell us what is coming next week, how can it predict what is coming in the next century? I'm not closed-minded enough to discount global warming in the last century. The glaciers in Alaska have retreated dramatically since their reach was first documented in the 1890s. The deserts have shifted and expanded, but how do we know we caused this? Is the sharp rise in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere our fault? If I could get past that premise, I'd be for changing course before we drive off a cliff. Last week I listened to Rob Fraley, Ph.D., Chief Science Officer with Monsanto. He's the man whose 25 years of work resulted in the introduction of herbicide tolerance and systemic insect defenses. He is now recognized in some circles as the father of agricultural biotechnology. Fraley's work in the introduction of new traits is independent of global climate change, but he asked the question: "Why don't we address climate change by adapting our farming practices (to deal with a warmer and dryer climate) rather than putting all our resources into slowing or changing its progression?" This follows the logic of our 20th century ancestors. They followed nature's lead and changed their farming practices so they were more sustainable: soil conservation, water conservation, progressive plant breeding, and introduction of biotechnology. Agriculture has learned that it can't beat nature, so it has to work with the natural environment to feed mankind. Available land and water are basic resources to which we add technology, capital and labor to produce crops and livestock. We have continued to feed an expanding population for 40 years more than was predicted (by scientists). The debate on global climate change should continue. I recommend that it be done via the Internet and not by flying large aircraft to Scandinavian cities. Sensors should be placed worldwide and monitored for trends that can be peer reviewed. Regulation of air and water should be kept within the boundaries of science and not expanded to include political causes. Meanwhile, agriculture should be provided incentives to continue production in a sustainable manner, no matter whether the weather gets warmer or colder. Editor's Note: Ken Root is an independent agricultural journalist. He was named the 2009 Farm Broadcaster of the Year and was the 2008 winner of the Oscar in Agriculture. He is an Oklahoma native and an experienced print, radio and television journalist. He has spent the last five years as Lead Farm Broadcaster at WHO Radio in¬ Des Moines, Iowa. He and his wife Gail have two adult children and two grandchildren.
1
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2011. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
|
