
<p>One of the problems in political discourse, in general, is that we too often debate headlines and narratives and not the basic facts. ; Nowhere is that truer than in so many of the discussions regarding climate change.</p>



<p>The headline debate is said to be between those who say the climate is warming and those who deny it. ; Actually, that is not the debate at all – or should not be. It is a narrative created for purely political advantage.</p>



<p>Virtually every scientist agrees that the earth has warmed up in recent years. ; That is not where the serious debate takes place.</p>



<p>The two issues that are more relevant are … how much does mankind add to the carbon emissions that are giving the earth a bit of a glasshouse effect and what can we do about it? ; </p>



<p>So, the first thing to get straight is where are all those harmful gases coming from? ; Many folks believe that mankind is a MAJOR contributor. ; Au Contraire. ; ;</p>



<p>The earth recycles about 100 billion tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) each year. Most of that comes from the land and the sea – and that is ten times as much as humans produce. ; Let that sink in. ; The natural environment on land and sea contributes 90 percent of all CO2 going into the atmosphere – almost equally divided between land and sea.</p>



<p>That may be both startling and enlightening since I cannot tell you how many times I have heard folks – even smart folks – say that we humans contribute most of the CO2. ; ;</p>



<p>The earth and the sea also absorb CO2 as part of the natural cycle – and that is where the controversy starts. If, by way of example, we assume that the land and sea each generate 45 billion tons of CO2 per year – and we humans add 10 billion tons – what gets absorbed?</p>



<p>Basically, the land and sea have a good recycling system. ; They essentially recycle what they expel. ; The problem rests with the 10 percent attributable to human activity. ; That is where the buildup takes place. ; While the land and the sea can absorb a portion of the man-made gases, they cannot absorb and recycle them all.</p>



<p>Most folks agree that reducing man-made carbon emissions is a good idea. ; Every little bit helps. ; But can we cut back sufficiently to reverse the greenhouse effect without plunging mankind back into the Stone Age? ; We may have to adjust to the reality of a warming planet for now. ; Earth will eventually cycle into a cooling period – but that may take a few thousand years.</p>



<p>The battle over climate change is based on two fronts. ; Internationally, a whole lot of countries would like America to take our foot off the accelerator of a dynamic economy for the benefit of our foreign competitors and adversaries. ; On the domestic side, Democrats find political advantage in taking the climate issue and inflating it to an end-of-the-world narrative through scaremongering for political benefit.</p>



<p>Since we are not going to stop global warming in its tracks (that has been proven over and over) – and there is no way we can reduce man-caused CO2 emissions sufficiently to solve the problem – we should probably focus our public policy efforts on (1) a REASONABLE plan to reduce CO2 emissions and (2) focus on mitigating the future impacts of global warming. ; And by “reasonable,” I mean something that would not turn America into a third-world country – as we help China and other countries become the new world leaders.</p>



<p>In terms of mitigation of rising temperatures, major coastal cities should be building infrastructure to deal with higher ocean levels. ; Zoning should be used to limit residential and commercial construction in coastal regions – especially those in the hurricane zone.  ; Zoning should be used to stop construction in river floodplains.</p>



<p>To mitigate the impact of western brush fires, we need to control housing developments in fire-prone regions – and undertake land management policies that will inhibit fire in residential areas.</p>



<p>In tornado-pone regions, building codes should be used to improve structural strength – and the routine construction of safe bunkers within the home.</p>



<p>A lot needs to be done – and can be done – if we stop debating climate change as some political Kabuki Theater that is long on political theatrics and short on common sense fact-based policies.</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>

Climate change debate ignores reality
