What's New Robert L. Park 8 Feb 2013

WHAT=92S NEW    Robert L. Park   Monday, 8 Feb 2013   Washington, DC

1. THE POLITICAL CLIMATE: GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT INEVITABLE.
"Don't look back," Satchel Paige warned, "something may be gaining on=20
you."  Like maybe global warming? The 37-nation Kyoto Protocol to reduce=20=

greenhouse gas emissions terminated on 1 Jan 2013, having accomplished=20=

little or nothing in 15 years. Indeed, climate scientists find atmospheri=
c=20
carbon increasing faster than ever. If all this is true, and I believe it=
=20
is, the vanishing of the Arctic=92s summer sea-ice could mark a tipping p=
oint=20
that will shift the Earth's climate into a new trajectory that could take=
=20
millennia to reach a new equilibrium, as Clive Hamilton points out in a=20=

brilliant new book, Requiem for a Species.  Sadly, the issue of climate=20=

change was almost totally ignored in the 2012 presidential election, push=
ed=20
aside by class warfare. Speaking of class warfare, that's not getting=20
better either.=20
=20
2. PERSONHOOD: HOW MANY CELLS DOES IT TAKE TO MAKE A PERSON?=20
A month ago the US Supreme Court ended an effort to shut down government=20=

support of human embryonic stem cell research by refusing to hear a case=20=

that challenged the legality of such work at NIH. Good!  Embryonic-stem-
cell research is thought by many to be the most promising approach to=20
treatment of numerous human diseases, but 20 years ago anti-abortionists=20=

pushed a bill through Congress banning the use of federal funds for=20
research on human embryos. Some religions believe the Holy Ghost bestows =
a=20
soul on a zygote at the moment of conception, making the zygote a one-
celled person (see What=92s New, 8 Nov 98). The Obama administration reje=
cted=20
this silly superstition, but it was kept alive in the courts by the appea=
l=20
process.  Rejection of the appeal by the Supreme Court assures resumption=
=20
of potentially life-saving stem-cell research.

3. FERTILITY: HOW MANY PERSONS SHOULD THERE BE ON EARTH?
About 6 billion fewer than the 7 billion we have now would be nice.  Our=20=

streams would again run clear, the Milky Way would return to the night sk=
y,=20
and cod fish to the Grand Banks.   However, in last Saturday's Wall Stree=
t=20
Journal, neoconservative writer Jonathan Last blamed a falling fertility=20=

rate for our financial problems.  He seems unaware of other problems in t=
he=20
world.  In fact, a modest decline in population is already seen in rich=20=

countries; that's why they're rich. But we live on a finite planet and=20=

there are already far too many of us. An average fertility rate of two=20=

would lead to a gradual reduction but there is no reason to hurry. Human=20=

history is largely an account of clumsy attempts to reduce populations by=
=20
war.   It usually has the opposite effect.=20

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND.
Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the
University of Maryland, but they should be.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.bobpark.org
What's New is moving to a different listserver and our
subscription process has changed. To change your subscription
status please visit this link:
http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbobparks-whatsnew&A=3D1