The key point about global warming is simple: we can't take the chance.
What are the odds we are causing climate change? Well, the great majority of scientists say we are, so the odds must be very high. But what if only a handful of scientists was concerned? Then, presumably, the odds would be low. So in that case would we be acting responsibly if we carried on with business as usual, not doing anything significant until the proof is undeniable? Only if we were suicidal.
What would we be risking with our lack of action? Well, what scientists are warning us about now is not so much a greenhouse gas effect but a runaway greenhouse gas effect. Global warming is reaching a point where we can no longer control it and threatens to escalate into catastrophe. The risk is the collapse of civilization as we know it and possibly worse. Only fools would unnecessarily risk such a loss. Even if only one qualified scientist insisted we are causing the Earth to warm up, we would be foolish not to act as if he was right. It is simple risk analysis: the risk we can afford to take decreases as the value of what we are risking increases.
Allow me a simple analogy. Let's assume you are at the beach and your child wants to go in for a swim. Unfortunately, the local fishermen think there are man-eating sharks just off the beach and they are hungry. Do you let your child go in? Of course not. But what if only one old fisherman is concerned, the others aren't sure, then do you let her go in? Or how about letting her go in slowly and tell her to come out when she sees a fin? OK? I doubt you would relent. We are not willing to unnecessarily risk something so precious. As with civilization, the only acceptable risk is the lowest one we can humanly achieve.
The skeptics have it precisely backwards. They insist we must have absolute proof of climate change before we take dramatic action. But given what we risk, good sense demands we take dramatic action until the skeptics can prove climate change is not a problem.
This of course they cannot do. The scientific consensus on climate change is solid and the proof increases daily. But even if it weren't, even if great doubt remained in the scientific community, we would be bound by reason to act and to act boldly. Unfortunately, all too many of us are missing this critical point.
"But even if it weren't, even if great doubt remained in the scientific community, we would be bound by reason to act and to act boldly. Unfortunately, all too many of us are missing this critical point."
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's more accurate to say: "But even if it weren't, even if great doubt remained in the scientific community, we would be bound by reason to act and to act boldly. Unfortunately, all too many of us are missing this critical attribute—reason."