When humans around the world encountered climate change 1,000 years ago, they found ways to adapt. As temperatures back then soared to record highs (the same as today’s high temperatures), people were willing to do anything necessary to survive the heat.
Now that humans are again encountering climate change, the need to adapt should be obvious. So, what adaptations are Democrat politicians proposing?
It wouldn’t be enough just to eliminate all use of fossil fuels. The humans who lived 1,000 years ago experienced climate change all over the globe although they weren’t using fossil fuels en masse. The Industrial Revolution had not yet occurred.
Reducing the use of fossil fuels is a good step, but it isn’t a cure-all. Neither is a complete elimination of any greenhouse gases released by human activity. The humans who lived 1,000 years ago weren’t manufacturing such gases, and yet they had to put up with sweltering heat.
In an opinion piece for The Hill, Johanna Partin and Nils Moe offer their ideas about how cities should adapt to rising temperatures. Even if one disagrees with some (or all) of their ideas, at least Partin and Moe are addressing the issue of adaptation.
Sure, one may comment, “Why ask just Democrat politicians? Why not ask Republican politicians, too?”
Answer: Because Democrat politicians are the ones acting as if climate change were a new phenomenon (which it isn’t).
Also, Republican politicians are slow in admitting that mankind is once again encountering climate change.
Of course this writer has his own ideas about what should be done.
First, the owners of all of that high-priced real estate along coastlines need to admit that they might have to pack up and move inland. That is how humans living 1,000 years ago adapted to rising sea levels.
Second, states need to create new water reservoirs in order to maintain an adequate supply of water. For too long, leaders of some states have assumed that their states can always get more water from other states. For millennia, humans have adapted to hotter, drier conditions by improving their means of storing water. That practice should not be abandoned.
Third, man-made heat islands may have to be eliminated. Reuters.com cites an example of such:
“In Seoul, for example, an elevated thoroughfare through the center of the city has been removed, opening up access to the river and lowering heat by at least half a degree . . . South Korea’s capital also has planted more than 16 million trees and created shaded cooling centers.”
Fourth, people may have to migrate to areas with fewer heat islands. Migration was one way that humans adapted to global warming 1,000 years ago.
Now, one might say, “Wait! Why don’t we just put an end to climate change once and for all?”
Answer: Because that isn’t possible. We can reduce (if not completely eliminate) mankind’s contribution to climate change, but we can’t stop Mother Nature from creating her own climate change.
Humans weren’t able to stop Mother Nature from changing the climate 1,000 years ago. What makes anyone think that humans can stop her now?