Why Global Warming doesn't really matter and being Green is so crucially important

There's a pretty big argument in America... well, the world, about 'global warming.'

Proponents of both sides of the issue use science to back up their beliefs, so generally they're both right. Here's the thing about this absurd debate: It doesn't matter. All the argument is doing is stalling gigantic technological advances that have the potential to put America back in it's standing as the most innovative, progressive nation on Earth.

Here's the big problem with global warming 'science.' It's impossible to get a definite answer either way. Ever. I'm not a scientist; I never even did very well in high school biology class... I did once own a chemistry set though. But I digress. What I do remember of science form my public school days is the need for a 'control.' In elementary school we tried growing grass in several different environments.
We cut a bunch of milk containers in half, filled them with the same soil and planted several packets of the same kind of seed. Then, the fun began. We put a planter in the closet, one in a shaded corner of the room, and one under a bright lamp. In a few short weeks, we would know what several different unnatural lighting conditions did to the grass. But how could have accurately understand what happened if we didn't know what would happen naturally? Enter the control. We put our final planter on the windowsill to soak up all the natural light it could.

To know for sure whether humans play a role in global warming, we would need access to alternate realities or other earths that never began burning fossil fuels orbiting the sun on the same path as Earth. In short, without a control we will never know. We could cut carbon emissions to zero and the climate may return to one we're comfortable with, it may keep right on doing what it's doing. We could double our carbon emissions and the Earth may bake and kill everything except cockroaches and Twinkies, or it might change to a climate we're comfortable with.

Essentially, no matter what we do and no matter what happens, we'll never ever ever know conclusively whether global warming is a liberal myth to allow Al Gore to run our lives or whether it's a cycle that's been repeated over the last few billion years (or 6,000 to 10,000 years for those of you who haven't succumbed to that liberal fairy tale called evolution).

To many, America 'going green' means the government telling us how to live our lives and forcing us to all drive a government issued Prius and limiting us to two hours of electricity in our homes a night and restricting elevators to people who cannot physically climb stairs. And under some leadership, that's all a definite possibility. But it's a far stretch on the probability meter.

One of the amazing things about our society is the ability to innovate, adapt and overcome. And with the proper prodding, and the depolarization of this issue, the free market will create and mass produce new technology that'll look to us in the coming decades like a '65 mustang would look to the founding fathers.

No one wants you to give up your SUV. We want you to call for the automakers to make better use of current technology so that that SUV uses less fossil fuels.
No one wants you to stop using electricity; we want you to use more fuel efficient technology like CFL bulbs and LED lights, and to build houses that will more effectively use natural lighting and to get the energy you do use from renewable sources like wind, solar, hydroelectric and geothermal.
And we want you to get your energy from more localized sources. When energy is created at a power plant, a lot of energy as heat is wasted in the creation. If the source was localized, the heat could be used to heat a house. Also, the further a unit of energy travels from its source, the more energy is lost in the transfer. Less energy is wasted when it only has to travel form a solar panel on your roof to a battery in your garage that'll light your CFLs when it's dark out than what would be lost to send the necessary energy from a power plant 30 miles away to light your conventional light bulb.

‘So what?’ you say. ‘Global warming isn't real, it isn't provable... who cares?’

Coal burning plants and gas-powered cars still create pollution that's bad for our bodies. Global warming or not, pollution is unhealthy. So who cares? China cares. India cares. And that alone should be enough to make America care.

They say necessity is the mother of invention. China and India are growing. Big time. That means higher energy demands, more pollution, worse health rates, and higher oil demands (which economics 101 teaches us means higher prices for everyone). We don't need these technologies in the way China and India need them… yet. But they're on their way, and they're just as innovative as the U.S. And whether or not we're at the point that we need cleaner technology, once it exists, it's only a matter of time before every modernized nation in the world uses clean energy exclusively.

China needs clean technology. If we don't act to create it for ourselves (which means we can sell it to them too!), we're going to be buying it from them in a decade or two. Too many Americans seem to have this notion that if we say we're great enough times it'll just stay that way. They just don't get that it took a lot of hard work and sacrifice to become great, and staying great is going to take far more effort than becoming great ever did.

We already have technology that can drastically lower our pollution rates. We need to use them to set the example for the rest of the world, and to bolster our economy by selling it to the world. We need a push by our government to move private industry toward jump-starting research and development into more sustainable and renewable technologies. We also need to keep an eye on our politicians to make sure they're acting in the best interest of the people and the nation as a whole, not in the best interest of corn farmers and oil importers. We need to ensure that our government is using these technologies as much as possible, and putting forth the idea that it's important; not pounding the American people with new regulations and restrictions that infringe on personal freedoms.

I don't believe the government should have the right to decide whether you can drive and SUV or not. But as long as the SUV does what it's meant to do why the hell do you care what powers it? (Unless of course you’re in the upper echelons of Exxon Mobile, in which case: suck it up, that’s business!)

But for argument's sake, let's say bolstering the dollar by creating the world's main supply of renewable energy technology isn't enough to get you on board. Let's look at a couple of other potential outcomes of renewable and non-fossil fuels. Both of my next two points refer to unrest in the Middle East: first, Iraq and then Iran.

Whatever the reason you believe we're in Iraq, oil plays a role. Liberating the people, an imminent threat of WMD, links to Al Qeada: those are all nice ideas, but the sad truth is, we're in Iraq because that's where the bulk of Earth's oil is (if that wasn’t true, we would be in Africa because there’s more suffering, North Korea because they posed a more imminent threat, and Pakistan because that’s where OBL probably is).
I realize that America doesn't get much oil from Iraq, but we use more oil than anyone else, and a disruption in anyone's oil supply is going to have an effect on our oil prices. That's basic economics. In short: If we didn't use oil, we wouldn't be in Iraq and we’d probably be finishing up in Afghanistan because our military wouldn’t be stretched so damn thin.

Now, Iran and nuclear capabilities. Countries use nuclear power for two things: bombs and energy. So any country trying to make bombs can easily claim that they're making power. But, what if we made it so nuclear power wasn't necessary?

Iran says, "We're enriching uranium so that we can build nuclear power plants."
America replies, "no need, we'll help you build the groundwork for a renewable energy system with solar and wind."

If they really are trying to make more efficient power (and I’m fairly certain they’re not), they'll take us up on the offer, and everyone's happy. But if they refuse our offer, we have a rock solid reason to suspect they're up to no good, and we have a concrete reason to bomb or invade the country.

Is our changing climate due to human involvement? Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know for sure. But the environmental, economic, diplomatic, and potential profit benefits of becoming a greener society are pretty close to limitless. Make no mistake, renewable/sustainable technology will power the world; and it's not a matter of if, but when. The if comes in when we ask: who is going to lead the charge? Technology exists, spend a few extra bucks and let the developers know you want it. It's up to the purchasing power of American consumers whether our solar panels will say 'Made in China,' or 'Made in America.'