Global Warming
My interest in global warming is three-fold: the first is scientific: is this all just a political bandwagon, driven by a misunderstanding of normal climatic cycles? Secondly, if it is a real phenomenon, then we have a responsibility to future generations: a part of what we refer to as a central philosophical plank: “Legacy.” Third is the impact of global warming on patterns of illness, in particular infectious and environmental pathogens, and how we can build resistance and resilience to them.
Some of the more recent evidence had a good airing on the Scientific American website.
My own view is that global is now clearly proven: I have just seen too much evidence, from walking the balmy streets of Stockholm in dead of winter when the temperatures should have been tens of degrees lower to an analysis of changing patterns not just of temperature, but of disease. The warming is a consequence of a lack of balance and harmony: too much Yang activity overwhelming the Yin necessary to stabilize the world. Or, in the language of spiral dynamics, too many people and social structures being stuck at the levels of the Red and Orange Memes.
The only thing that I find a little irksome is the number of people who lecture us about global warming while continuing to engage in all kinds of activities that contribute to the problem. Your humble reporter first became interested in installing solar panels while still living in England. Not practical in a country where once the sun rarely shone very much, and where the panels used to be prohibitively expensive.
We plan to install some next year, while continuing drastically to conserve other resources. And to try and anticipate the impact of global climate change on illness.