|
Truth “In the Eyes of Hurricanes”
By Dan Spillane, The Liberty Whistle
--Bush, Cheney, Zell Miller Need to Apologize
--Hurricane Threat Far Exceeds WMD
--Warming vs. “Natural Cycle” is Wrong Debate
(SEATTLE) 09/13/04 -- While the US media roars about which presidential candidate “might or might not” defend the country against terrorism, the discussion has itself grown into what it seeks to defeat. Recently, Mr. Cheney went so far as to employ terror on his own people for political means, by suggesting the country might be attacked if he lost power.
But as we focus on the terror threat—apparently, while we are expected to be trembling under our beds—we might miss so many other dangers in the world. After all, while September 11th was terrible, attacks against the US at home and abroad have been rather infrequent both before and since. Indeed, improved US security measures at home appear to be working. And importantly, examples abound in the Middle East that clearly demonstrate attacks beget revenge attacks—even for decades at a time, and running. So what other threats lurk in our future?
An important example--occurring with increasing frequency and intensity--are tropical hurricanes. Take Florida over the past few weeks, where two severe hurricanes have hit, a third is on the way, a fourth is headed towards Mexico and California, and incredibly, a fifth is newly forming (as of the date of this article). This is certainly a growing danger, and a hurricane is about as massive a destructive force as our planet offers. It turns out, the energy of a hurricane is truly “massively destructive”—it often exceeds that of a nuclear bomb. (1) So if the US has multiple nuclear bombs headed in its direction in just a few weeks, why aren’t leaders saying anything about it? Indeed, what long-term policy decisions have been made to defend against this growing threat--occurring with both higher frequency and more destructive force than terrorist attacks?
According to the best available research, we know that warmer oceans lead to more frequent and intense hurricanes—which is the cause currently, along with a few other factors. It is also known that global temperatures have been rising due to global warming, induced by higher energy use, and projections call for even more changes; in fact, the Bush administration (or portions of it) has recently admitted global warming is a problem. And yet there is currently a debate of whether the current wave of hurricanes is due to “global warming,” or due to a “natural cycle currently on the rise.”
Unfortunately, therein lies a serious logic problem—in treating the debate as if there are two mutually exclusive possibilities leading to a rash of hurricanes. This leaves out the third possibility--which is supported by the most evidence—with both natural hurricane and man-made warming cycles rising simultaneously. Indeed, the media is properly quoting experts who have reason to believe past natural cycles have occurred, and such a multi-decade cycle is currently on the rise, since 1995. But at the same time, there are myriad independent symptoms of rapidly increasing global temperatures, which started well before 1995, and have been rising constantly. In fact, some warming symptoms have arisen rather suddenly.
So no scientist can truly tell us what the outcome of a rise in twin cycles might be--since this is the first time the “natural cycle” is combined with the current level of man-made global warming. But disturbingly, even if critics are right, and global warming plays no part in what we are seeing play out in Florida now, we’re still left with the likelihood that the current natural increase cycle could last for decades; moreover, we are told nevertheless to expect increasing intensity due to global warming alone, when the natural cycle ebbs. In short, hurricane problems in Florida are not likely to end soon, for not simply one, but two reasons—in fact, hurricanes are most likely to worsen. People will, understandably, no longer wish to live in southern coastal areas; insurance companies will find it impossible to cover such liability. Such may even happen later this year.
And so here lies the nexus of proper debate this election year--in the eyes of hurricanes, which are certainly ‘oiled’ by increased use of energy. That is, the destructive force seen now in the Gulf of Mexico is the shape of things to come--no matter what the cause. Moreover, several elected officials have done absolutely nothing to defend us, and everything possible to put us in more danger. Notably, there is Sen. Zell Miller, who acted legislatively in favor of big auto and oil companies, nixing pollution standards for SUVs. Next, and more recently, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney acted to pass tax cuts leading to still more SUV use--and as well, started the Iraqi war, which produces untold pollution. And if its true that they seek Iraqi’s oil reserves, we could be in for a lot of trouble should that energy be released.
So the three—Bush, Cheney, and Miller--need to apologize for the current wave of hurricanes, and for endangering the country and our future with the force of hundreds of nuclear bombs. Only after that apology, might we talk about our false belief that Saddam Hussein could threaten the US--with but a tiny fraction of the destructive force already evidenced in the Gulf of Mexico this year.
Footnotes, Additional reading:
(1) Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory; the calculation of 1.3 x 10e17 Joules/day is comparable to that of a nuclear explosion (at least); other sources suggest Hurricanes carry 10,000 times the energy of a nuclear bomb. Estimate -- one with seventeen zeros after it units of energy
(2) SUV Report
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
