Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

It's Not Just Eskimos in Bikinis

By Chip Ward, Tomdispatch.com. Posted June 7, 2005.


As long as we're talking about ice in distant climes, global warming seems like something that's happening elsewhere and to somebody else -- or some other set of creatures.
Advertisement

When we hear the term "global warming," we usually imagine collapsing Antarctic ice shelves, melting Alaskan glaciers, or perhaps starving polar bears wandering bewildered across an ice-free, alien landscape. Warnings about climate change tend to focus on the Earth's polar regions, in part because they are warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet and the dramatic changes underway there can be easily captured and conveyed.

We may not be able to see the 80% decline in the Antarctic krill population -- the tiny, shrimp-like creatures that are a critical food source for whales, seals, and sea birds -- but we can easily see satellite photos of state-sized chunks of ice shields separating from the continent. We can grasp the enormity of planetary glacial melting simply by comparing photos of glaciers taken just a decade apart.

But as long as we're talking about ice in distant climes, global warming seems like something that's happening elsewhere and to somebody else -- or some other set of creatures.

So when you hear about global warming, the odds are good that you never think of the yellow-bellied marmot. Probably, you've never even heard of the critters, but the big rodents, common not to the distant Arctic but to Rocky Mountain meadows, have been acting like so many canaries lately -- coal-mine canaries, that is. They may be the first among many species in the Lower 48 to die off, thanks to close-to-home global warming effects that we hear little about. They are dying of confusion.

As a term, global warming is so benign-sounding -- we all like "warmth," after all -- that it masks what's actually going on. Yes, temperatures overall are rising, low-lying islands are disappearing under the sea, and epic wildfires are becoming more routine. But some places like Europe could get much colder in a globally "warmed" world, if warm ocean currents shift away from them; while across the planet, however counterintuitive this might seem, floods are likely to be as commonplace as drought.

"Climate disruption" is probably a more accurate description of what we are experiencing than mere "warming." Although the radical break in climate patterns now underway will lead to rising oceans and expanding deserts, the most insidious changes may be more subtle -- and as unnoticed as the disappearance of the marmots may be.

The intricate and precisely timed collaborations of plants, animals, birds, and insects, fine-tuned over endless thousands of years of evolution, is inevitably short-circuited when the weather goes whacky over periods of time that are the geological equivalent of a wink. When environmental events and biological events that once fit together lose their synchronicity, the consequence can be extinction. Even the Pentagon realizes that, if dependable local weather patterns become erratic, chaos can ensue as, for instance, crops begin to fail. Some of the less adaptable wild creatures, great and small, who share our American backyards are already coping with the kind of eco-havoc we can as yet only imagine for ourselves. For them, a more accurate description of what is happening might be Eco-Topsy-Turvy or, perhaps, Climate Helter-Skelter.

Take that marmot, for example. The yellow-bellied marmot's hibernation habits are guided by ancient circadian rhythms that are cued by seasonal changes in light and temperature. Like their cousin Punxsutawney Phil, the marmots awake from winter hibernation in their underground burrows and surface when they sense that the earth is warming. In recent years, conservationists have been reporting that marmots are emerging from their holes a month sooner than expected. But if the ground warms before deep snowpack melts, which is now often the case, the emerging marmots cannot get to their food and they starve.

For the purple larkspur, which shares the marmot's meadow, the problem is the opposite. When spring temperatures grow warmer ever earlier, snow cover melts earlier as well and the larkspur, one of the first plants to bloom in American alpine meadows, puts out vulnerable buds weeks too soon -- for even if the snow cover has mostly melted, frost remains a serious threat in early spring and a single cold night will wipe out those tender buds. No buds, no seeds. No seeds, eventually no larkspurs.

No larkspurs, no nectar for queen bumblebees which produce worker bees for hives and no larkspur blossoms for hummingbirds. When pollinators like bees and hummingbirds disappear from a landscape that depends on them to carry out its annual renewal, a cascade of ill-effects ripples through the ecosystem.


Digg!

Chip Ward is a political activist who is organizing resistance to the dumping of nuclear waste in Utah's deserts. He is the author of Hope's Horizon: Three Visions for Healing the American Land (Shearwater/Island Press) and is the assistant director of the Salt Lake City Public Library System.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
JINGOIST
Posted by: jingoist on Jun 7, 2005 4:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You enviro-communists have used statistics to lie for many years now. "Whatever it takes", right. For those of you with the courage I suggest Michael Crichton's latest book. It's crammed full of empirical studies on atmospheric, oceanic, and glacial retreat(AND advance). Losing your religion is tough, but in this case it's the first step to freedom. Good luck in your endeavor!! JINGOIST

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: ssegallmd
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: prgodwin
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: diamondvajra
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: kateulu
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: kk33deg
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: thirdmg
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: WhatNow?
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: h2oaso
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: larrybob
MY GENERATION'S LEGACY
Posted by: ssegallmd on Jun 7, 2005 4:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a charming legacy our generation of Americans leaves to the world and its future:

(1) Global warming and its consequences to the food and water supply as described above facilitated by American junk science and a religious ethic that places no value on a world thought soon to be swept away by Armageddon.

(2) Human overpopulation of the world over made worse by America's archaic religious values that use dollar diplomacy to limit family planning (education, abortion, contraception, etc.).

(3) Massive tracts of land made uninhabitable for centuries (especially in Iraq and Afghanistan) by diffusely scattered depleted uranium from American dirty bombs.

(4) Massive debt (Americans only) from foolish wars and tax cuts.

You and I might not be to directly to blame, but we are the people of the generation that will be held responsible by the heirs to our legacy for the selfishness and short-sightedness of our present leadership and the ennui that characterizes the bulk of the rest of us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unacceptable language
Posted by: mary-margaret on Jun 7, 2005 5:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Eskimos don't exist. It is a negative term in fact.

There are many first nations that live in the Arctic including the Denei and the Inuit. There are Northern Cree.

Regardless of the colourful image you are portraying, I would hope that Alternet's headline writers would work towards a more accurate language standard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Unacceptable language Posted by: monkeywrench
Direct Human Death
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Jun 7, 2005 5:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Heat waves and droughts kill though more than starvation. Air conditioning isn't terribly common. Elderly and other vulnerable people have died in Chicago and France during recent heat waves. Heat stroke and dehydration are bad news. Pollution can get trapped in cities when it's warm, creating more asthma deaths. In warm areas like Phoenix and Sacramento, we're looking at a rise in summer highs that will make a lot of activities such as construction and exercise difficult.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Life???
Posted by: Scott on Jun 7, 2005 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hurrah, life on this planet as we know may soon be over!! Ah, to return to the days of fewer people, less impact on the planet, a far simpler life, no worries about the future, your health conditions, you will die when you get sick, fewer kids to have to raise and educate, we'll all return to the Stone Age which is abt. what God meant for us when he created this place! This planet was not designed to handle the society created by the great American experiement of CONSUMERISM!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Life??? Posted by: bettsoff
Country cousin
Posted by: babyrobin on Jun 7, 2005 7:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This thing is scary. Calling the whistle blowers names won't make it go away. Think, instead, about what you are doing to help to keep the planet liveable.

Michael Crichton is talking about changes that took a long time. We're seeing these within the decade.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Country cousin Posted by: nakis
Let's look ahead a bit
Posted by: Rototoko on Jun 7, 2005 9:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Though I tend to agree with the reality of global warming and all of it's potential impacts on life, might this "alarmist" attitude be short sighted? There has been enough science done to confirm that we (the earth) in now in a decline of life. Ultimately no life will exist here. Perhaps we should examine our emotional responses to the concept of life no longer existing on earth. I can hear the chorus of: "No! No! No! We can't stant the thought of it!" Perhaps we shouldn't get so attached to "our little lives"? Just like you and me, suns die, solar systems die. Worry not so much, out of the ashes will new Phoenix's arise! I too get caught up in the profound wonder of all this diversity of life... but as resiliant and as profound as life seems, it is fleeting. We no more have the ability to change our destiny than to create new stars. In this seemingly endless continuium there is only change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Let's look ahead a bit Posted by: ssegallmd
» RE: Let's look ahead a bit Posted by: Rototoko
Environmental Gambling
Posted by: nakis on Jun 7, 2005 9:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once thing the article didn't mention is the millions of acres of land on earth that recieve most of their water from glacial runoff. Starvation of hundreds of millions is just around the corner.

This many be a little simplified but when you think about it which way would you want to err?

Say we go the anti- environmentalists route and we ignore all the warnings and don't take any pro-environmental steps, within this century the devestation we are creating there will be billions dead, the survivors will be living mostly in domes, drinking only filtered water. Next to worst case (worst case we change the planet too much and we all die) all the anti-environmentalists (who survived) will regret not listening to the 'intellectuals' and 'scientists' with their mumbo-jumbo and manipulation of the facts to suit their selfish designs of wanting clean air and clean water, untainted food and all that crap. And not getting a dime out of it.

Say we take the environementalists route. By the end of the century we have clean water, clean air, good food, we remediated most of the damage done. We have billions of healthy people running around, healthy ecosystems, no dramatic weather changes that avoid the collapsing of economies and stops the wars that come from them.

Which way do you want to err? Follow the people who wish to ignore all the evidence pointing to disaster and suffer the consequences?
Or take the safe road. The one that protects and insures that we will do what we can to secure the 'sanctity of life'.

To me it's a no brainer. If the environmentalists are wrong. If the scientists are wrong. What's the worst that can happen. You end up with a healthy biosphere.
Go the other road and you have hell to pay. For you religious people you really have hell to pay for messing up Gods planet. Don't think that sins only apply for lying, stealing and ethical breaches of people like Delay, Bush, wealthy elite, it applies to the entrustment of taking care of the least of your brothers and the planet that supports them.

Sorry about the rant.
Funny how those words 'sanctity of life' never really apply to anything other than what's on the neocon agenda. That the millions of preventable deaths from AIDS, starvation, depravation, diseases, violence, hatred, etc... don't really make that 'sanctitiy of life' radar screen. Those cost profits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Insurance will solve it...Global Warming
Posted by: osisbs on Jun 7, 2005 9:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you do a google search under "global warming swiss re" you'll see that Swiss RE is one of the world's largest reinsurance companies (the reinsurance business DWARFS the world petroleum business) has an entire division set up to limit their exposure to global warming. Insurance on the Florida coast will soon be a thing of the past, same with crop insurance, flood insurance, drought protection, and so on. Not to mention the health insurance costs for all the folks keeling over from the heat in Fla, Tx and Az. The invisible hand will take care of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's fiction!
Posted by: Unsui on Jun 7, 2005 9:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Micheal Chrichton's book is nice, it's just not true. He is a science FICTION writer! If you like to read what the scientific community really thinks try Scientific American or maybe National Geographic. You can enjoy your ficticious fantasy all you want of course, but it won't change the reality of the situation. Of course the truth is a little hard to face so you might just want to continue with the science fiction and ignore the science evidence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"If We Don't Change, It's Over"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jun 7, 2005 11:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Quote from the article: "Although we live in a culture that encourages and enables us to think, feel, and act as if we were above and beyond nature. . ."

This is largely the result of organized, western religion, which is based on the beliefs that we were not of this Earth, but created in the image of God, plunked down here, and given this playground by Him (why not "Her"?) to do with as we will – to go forth and multiply, and hold dominion over the plants and animals.

Aside from being enormously egocentric, these deeply-held beliefs, backed by the full weight of "THE WORD OF GOD," have been instrumental in justifying widespread human destruction, AND will be enormously difficult to overcome, considering the propensity of humans – especially here in America – to choose unproven beliefs over verifiable reality.

In short, if we do not change our belief systems, change our relationship to our world, and give up our insistance that happiness can only be found in greedy materialism, I fear that for us, it may well be over.

Granted, people have been predicting the end of the world for centuries. But it's not the end of the world I'm talking about; it's the end of us, as we know it today. Oh, humans will still be around, and we should not be so egotistical as to think we can destroy the Earth. No, Mother Nature will eventually put us in our place, and the world will go on spinning, as it has for 5 billion years or so. But, if we don't change our ways and live more in harmony with this planet, it will eventually change them for us – and the results won't be very pretty.

Remember – the dinosaurs were the most successful large life-form in Earth's history, lasting around 250 million years to our paultry 3 million. Seen any lately?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Collective Fart
Posted by: coyote on Jun 7, 2005 1:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Too bad we can't open a window. Enjoy the smell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: JINGOIST
Posted by: maxpayne on Jun 7, 2005 6:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, JINGOIST, we know how desperate you are but you can't stop us from taking back our country and democracy from your favorite neocon fascists no matter how hard you try. :)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
climate change
Posted by: larrybob on Jun 12, 2005 1:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"If inaction risks drought, flood, monster storms, pestilence, epidemics, ..."
Maybe this part is a certainty,not a risk. The thing that changing our ways might stop it from getting really bad, after all,USA can start canals going into Canada to get the water from there, for a while anyway

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]