I'm no climate scientist either, but I remember reading something "recently" (I'm 51; recently has become a pretty elastic term, but I think it was written within the past 20 years) looked at the predictions of a renewed ice-age and wondered whether the agricultural revolution — with all its forest-chopping and farming — has forestalled it.
Greenhouse-gas emissions have probably put off the next ice age for many thousands of years. There's a minority position among climate-contrarian types that global warming is real, but it's good, because we would have otherwise been hit by the ICE DOOM by now (the position in Fallen Angels, if I recall correctly).
As far as I can tell the timing of the ice age is nonsense, it wouldn't have happened for thousands of years, but the basic principle of anthropogenic global warming killing it is sound.
I think the popularity of this position in the science-fiction community comes from a 1986 Analog article by George W. Harper called "A Little More Pollution, Please!" I recall T. A. Heppenheimer citing it as a good argument that AGW was a good thing.
I think the popularity of this position in the science-fiction community comes from a 1986 Analog article by George W. Harper called "A Little More Pollution, Please!"
Belatedly replying to say, Yes, I'm pretty sure that's where I heard it. The timing and source certainly fit.
Praise to the anthropocene?
Re: Praise to the anthropocene?
As far as I can tell the timing of the ice age is nonsense, it wouldn't have happened for thousands of years, but the basic principle of anthropogenic global warming killing it is sound.
I think the popularity of this position in the science-fiction community comes from a 1986 Analog article by George W. Harper called "A Little More Pollution, Please!" I recall T. A. Heppenheimer citing it as a good argument that AGW was a good thing.
Re: Praise to the anthropocene?
Belatedly replying to say, Yes, I'm pretty sure that's where I heard it. The timing and source certainly fit.