Ruddiman

After reading Ruddiman's proposed hypothesis of earth's ancestors contributing a large amount of the CO2 and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, I was left skeptical. His argument, although scientifically reasonable according to his data, suggests that humans actually delayed the ice age by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere from removing trees for agriculture thousands of years ago. Contrasting scientific data (presented in class), suggests a similar trend over a period of time, however the spike in the data occurred sometime within the last 200 years or so since the industrial revolution. I personally believe that industrial pollution, harmful CFCs, and CO2 emissions contribute more to the increase in our global temperature now more so than ever before in history. Of course cutting down a tree will allow more CO2 to escape into the atmosphere, however driving around in an old diesel truck with 8mpg will have even more damaging effects. As our technology increased, the CO2 emissions drastically increased. However, I do agree with Ruddiman's argument that epidemics caused CO2 levels to drop as the mortality rates caused untended farmland; leading to the CO2 levels to decrease due to forest growth. CO2 levels correlate with the mortality rates due to reforestation. However, since climate change negatively affects the population in this way, I feel that a possible solution (following his argument), that the logical response would be for a population cap. For example, the Year Without Summer article mentions the bubonic plague emerging from the rapid climate change from the Mt Tambora eruption in 1815. I believe that with increased CO2 levels, we will as a result have increased famine and disease, and therefore, if we could put a cap on population, less people would be negatively affecting the environment which may lead to the possibility of the rejuvenation of our planet.