In developing a policy, as a broad generalisation, it is wise to explore the possible adverse effects as well as the advantages of adopting that policy.
But if you have an enemy on your borders and delay may mean that your efforts to repel an invasion will be unlikely to succeed, what should you do?
“India and China as well as the USA are responsible for the greatest increases in emissions. Our efforts will be wasted if they do nothing.”
“Solar panels will not last for ever and we may have significant problems recycling them.”
“We have survived an earlier Ice Age, and Warm and Cold periods have happened before, so what is the problem now?”
“Why are people so certain that mankind has been responsible for the present increase in temperatures?”
These are some of the arguments being put by people who do not agree that there is an urgent need to drastically reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
There are, in fact, plenty of countries which are not only doing something positive but are creating impressive milestones.
Please note – whenever something is stated as a ‘fact’, ideally it should be followed by the statement “based on current knowledge”. And that knowledge is based on scientific research which has determined the level of probability of a particular hypothesis – and on accurate reporting. The more likely it is to be true, the more confidence we can place in that ‘fact’.
Death, taxes and change are, after all, pretty much the only certainties in life! You don’t know when you will die, how much tax you will pay in the future nor how much change will occur!
At this point in time, we do know there is no Planet B!
People get confused by the concept of ‘climate’, which is inherently local. When scientists are talking about July 2019 being the hottest month on record, and you are freezing in Antarctica, you need to realise that they are referring to the highest average world temperature, which takes account of the whole world, not just a region.
The whole climate change, global warning issue is a whole world issue requiring cooperation which is only slowly forthcoming.
In the last election campaign, Bill Shorten was vilified because he would not answer the question as to now much his plans to counter global warming would cost.
What he should have answered, is “How much will it cost over the next decade to repair damage and recompense people if the severe weather patterns, droughts, fires and storms we have been experiencing actually continue or even worsen?”
How long is a piece of string?
The adults who criticise Greta Thunberg should be charged with child abuse!
She has a brain which is capable of analysis and research at a level way beyond most of them. She has researched the data, she is quoting the experts and she is fighting for a future for her own and following generations.
As are many adults who fear for the future of their own grandchildren. They are, in many cases, activists who are fighting for survival of humanity, against government inaction and flawed policies.
Greed and monetary interests have taken priority in most governments, including our own. We talk endlessly about the economy but we brush aside criticism of government policies which are actually hurting vulnerable people.
We have truly lost our moral compass, following get-rich-quick cults and ignoring the needs of those who do not have a chance to ‘have a go’!
We waste food while the poor in other countries – and some in our own – are starving.
We have developed a throw-away economy where manufacturers build in obsolescence.
We pollute to the point that some fresh water sources are no longer suitable for consumption.
The rate of loss of species diversity is enormous. No surprise, when we recognise that humankind is the Earth’s most dangerous predator!
The clock is ticking ever closer to Doomsday, and all the wealth, in financial terms, which a few have accumulated, will not save them forever when the air and water are polluted and the temperatures soar out of control! They might end up living lonely lives in luxurious caves!
Government funding cuts and concentration on research that brings in money has not yet quite destroyed the CSIRO. We have plenty of sources of viable plans for action.
All is not lost – yet!
Please can we persuade governments, starting with our own, that time is truly running out for action to be effective.
Stop thinking “What’s in it for me?” and start thinking “How can we ensure that humankind survives in a world which is not totally hostile?”
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!