Global warming and the signs of time: Is the world about to end?
7 min readBy Madit Them Arop, Juba, South Sudan
September 7, 2016 (SSB) — One of the analysts elsewhere has reported one major obstacle on its briefing that the world is approaching to an end. The cause according to the paper was because of the global warming and other unknown threats. It is not clear whether the report was predicted or on proven conclusion. Hardly as it seem, nobody can understand logic behind the reported issue as fact or non-natural.
Others still think if the world is ending how valid would this substantiation be taken serious and truthful? Because ending of the world is not a simple and easy thing to deal with or talk about; it is bloodcurdling, ugly, unattractive, it concerns all creatures dwelling on it and it affects them equally when it happen.
Also and if indeed it is going to end, then what is next? Or what is going to happen and who is to remain? Ending here may means a world without land, ground, soil, animals, humans, space, but just a world without boundaries, no ends, only oceans, lakes could exist.
But then again when they exist, they exist on what? The world has disappeared. Where can we expect oceans to occupy? What about space? Will space still exist while the world does not exist anymore? A space without world could be world without space. Would the universe along with its other bodies still sustain the same names or would they change? And who is going to identify them being of what they might be? It is confusing, conditions and justifications are needed to address this such that the conclusion is valid and theoretical.
Correspondingly and going back to the Global Warming, What is global warming? What it does? How was it known that it was global warming? What procedures followed? If it is global warming, then it can’t be controlled? Can global warming be blocked? What caused global warming? How do we deal with it? Can it causes be alleviated?
The ending world is world without life, no living creatures; an absence of any living may means that the world has reached nothingness point of view, an end of living and perhaps existing. Considering living and existing altogether departed, no more survival, life turned to lifeless, and then what is the way forward?
Well, if living-existing vanished, meaning buried forever, what assurances are left? To whom did such assurances left with? In this case, though complicated, one may think of death itself. The death is clearly measured the only entity in existence and its gate is the way forward. The death of course has taken over, but taking over on what since the world is no-longer available, living grew meaningless, existing at state of pointless. Could death takes what shape? Perhaps, in a sense, the shape of all living and non-living creatures existed in the gone world or it could take closer identity to a chosen creature in both worlds.
Here and again, when looking at life it becomes empty, death has taken life, which is true. What about disappearance of the world? Who is responsible? Well and imaginably, the global warming and it agents. Can it be proven correct? Not sure, but if the world is no longer with death, because death and the world should have remained such that death can stay in the world, and the world stay natural. Then empirical thoughts are warranted on this evidence.
Still, can nature die? It’s doubted but without proper justifiable empirical works. The disappearance of the world leads to doubt on nature itself, because nature in a logical sense is an “as is” entity without spare or alteration. It can’t be changed using other artificial or worldly ideas. Now that nature changes make reasoning a bit complicated due to the fact that death is seen as in charge over the world, which replaced the nature in other words. And therefore, nature has turned to something else not sure of.
But should other creatures in the category of non-living things be seen separate from death? Because death is in the position of breathless since it takes life of living things. Certainly, it is valid to think as such. Dying and death are cousins, in this view, dying is a process of wrestling with life trying to cease it from breathing, and death is an actor responsible for taking life away from the owner. After death conquered life, got rid of, death is now in charge.
So dying is an independent entity forced the ending world to nullity, outcome turn out to be the death world. The two follows one another, to die means death has made it happen. What is not clear is whether death could stand tall independently alone without dying itself. This is where the ending world comes in with more complications.
But to assume that the world has ended has mixed obstacles to settle. One is to address the global warming on higher level basis. To find out what it means, what aspects caused it, how it should be tackled for the reason that it preventions stand as a general threat possibly to the remnants after the previous buried world. Yet, though not confident, these remnants opinionated questionable on whether or not, the remnants could be considered as “remains” since the wipeout has taken place. No one can be sure to differentiate between the gone world and unknown world after the first world.
The second step in naming the other as “world” or giving it another name is uneasy to deal with, because it’s difficult to make decision on surety basis. It won’t be clear that the issue trying to address is true and it is there or some ideas are just being played with in order to help have the right proposals. It is left open for more unpacking approaches.
Third, it is vital to make causes and preventions of global warming a priority. By doing this, it’d lead to make known causes of the deadly warming. In fact, some experts thought that global warming is caused by heated gasses, polluting of airs, magma heats, volcanic acids or solid fluids, which make the world environment unclean, unsafe, and inhaling airs unfriendly. More energy releases from sources responsible for destructions rise the world level gradually. And when this happens a lot more follows.
The ended world could be followed by another world of the same setting or in different format formed at expense of replacing the outdated one. Or, no other world would be available since imaginably the world has reached its pension age, the nothingness. Nothingness in a sense may consist of both beginning and ending destiny combined. In other words, nothingness would have no ending or beginning, either way is genuine. Or it is in dilemma to prove one correct while leaving the other incorrect.
The beginning of a fresh start and ending of a disaster. The opposite could justify the ends. Therefore, global warming may take natural outlook since it can dismantle the natural world, make it all water or dry it up or set it differently either on constant fire or drought or dust or bury it indefinitely.
Then it is now in control. The world is turn to global warming world. And if this occurs then the world could now be called the global warming as it’s the convincing name available to justify naming after the lost world. After naming take root with different appearances, controlling on the new world is now up to the remaining folks or others unknown but assume out there, like the Godly society to reshape it and monitor it.
Reaching at packing the upside down or destroyed world may convince us that those in charge have started anew, new life with defects or without any form of defects is in place, new folks are in control, managerially cares for by the holy almighty at his whereabouts. It has ended and has started. The ending world and the new world.
The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made are the responsibility of the author, not PaanLuel Wël: South Sudanese Bloggers (SSB) website. If you want to submit an opinion article or news analysis, please email it to paanluel2011@gmail.com. SSB do reserve the right to edit material before publication. Please include your full name, email address and the country you are writing.
About Post Author
