An Inconvenient Truth

My daughter’s class went to watch An Inconvenient Truth, a movie by Al Gore on global warming. There was a panel who, my daughter and her classmates thought, would entertain questions and have discussion. Her classmates, she said, had prepared 18 questions to put forth. The chance never materialized. I asked her about the movie. She said it was sad and very depressing.
There are many things about global warming that she did not understand. She had grasped the basic principle of warmth not being sufficiently reflected back to outer space and as a result, it creates heat. I asked her what was their first question. She said, their first question was, “Will man evolve?” If you are a die-hard supporter of the theory of evolution, then the answer would be yes. The challenge of this point of view is that it was such a random event (mutating genes and the like), that how would you know whether you would survive or not. On the other hand, if you are a strong supporter genetically modified organisms, then of course, our evolution has been well under way for some time as the food we eat is genetically modified and this in turn will modify us. What made her feel uncomfortable is the first inconvenient truth: the world that results from global warming is the world she and her children will live in.
That human beings cause global warming is not a mystery. In fact, global warming happened even long before we came along. It was a necessary ingredient for the primordial soup that some scientists believe is the source of life. On the other hand, for those who take the standpoint of divine intervention in the earth’s creation, global warming also was necessary at the start. God’s warmth, a picture of His love, flooded the earth and created the space for man to live and grow. So one may say that global warming is not necessarily a bad thing. It was, at a time, essential for life to come into being on earth.
Today, however, it appears that global warming is killing off life. Numerous studies will readily show how the world’s temperature is rising and that species of flora and fauna are dying off. But is this not consistent with the theory of evolution that only the fittest survive? In a world conceived in this fashion, then the world should be full of “fittest” and so new “unfit” flora and fauna would have to arise. Here arises another inconvenient, although obvious, truth: in a world that is changing, death is part and parcel of that change.
My daughter asked, “What can we do?” Yes, what can we do? Can we stop change? Can we stop global warming? Can we prevent death? Can we make the future look brighter instead of bleaker? What can we do?
Scores of people will flock to the idea that we must preserve and conserve the environment. But won’t preservation and conservation prevent change? Well, we could always say that is healthy change and there is unhealthy change. How would we know the difference? I am overweight and have hypertension. This is an unhealthy change to my body as most doctors will readily say. Can any good come from this unhealthy change? One answer is no; I am stuck with this condition for the rest of my life and I will have to take scores of drugs to delay or mitigate the inevitable – death. It’s interesting because to the best of my knowledge, at some point in time, I too will die. Then it becomes described as an untimely death. I’m not entirely sure what a timely death is. In any case, this is one possible point of view. On the other hand, the opposite answer of yes is also possible. My condition has made me reflect on my like, my lifestyle, my habits – both good and bad. It had created in me a greater awareness of who I am, where I came from and where I am going. It makes me more awake to the experiences of my body (as every little ache and pain is now given the closest attention) and it forces me to confront my fears. I believe, that this is a good thing that has resulted from my unhealthy condition. Perhaps, therefore, we come to a third inconvenient truth: our understanding or relation with the environment must transform. A new point of view is needed, one that will create balance. While it is true that our models for this balance were what the environment used to be, it is also true that we cannot restore the environment. To do so would not only mean replanting and reviving extinct species, it would also mean reducing global population by unimaginable numbers. Of course humanity, in its very limited way, tries to do this through wars, famines, self-induced epidemics, and general inhumanity to other human beings. And perhaps, were are not reducing population fast enough because the global population continues to grow – a natural consequence of being the “fittest” species. Yes, a new point of view needs to be revealed.
Will humanity evolve? This was my daughter’s first question. When we look at our physical bodies, so puny next to other animals and yet so pliant and flexible to change, the answer could be very easily – no. However, other facets of humanity still need to grow and develop and evolve. Our sense of feeling and compassion still needs to evolve. Our sense of empathy still needs to evolve. Our sense of thinking, even, still needs to evolve. And for these to evolve, perhaps, what the humanity needs is the right wake up call or challenge: wars, famines, epidemics, a dying world.
The world is alive and we are part of it, not because we can stand on it pretend to rule. We are physically part of the world. The very strata of silica that makes up the soil of the earth also makes up the composition of our skin. Our very beings are embodiments of the world. We have our own rivers, oceans, flora and fauna. Each of us is so alike and yet so different. Humanity on earth is a literal galaxy of worlds. Therein, perhaps, lies the new perspective of our relationship with the earth and the environment: developing a healthy relationship to ourselves and other human beings.