Two green items
(1) This weekend's New York Times Magazine is the "Green Issue" with a wealth of articles on environmental issues and their solutions. The range of authors they got to contribute is pretty impressive.
(2) A video on YouTube which simplifies thinking about our choices regarding climate policy, and provides a compelling argument that action is the right choice, even if climate science turns out to be wrong:
Labels: climate change, environmental, global warming
1 Comments:
I still think that "row thinking" is important here, i.e., that we need to study global warming enough to get some informed estimation of what the risks actually are. This is where scientists can help out. So global warming is "uncertain". Well, how uncertain is it? There are a host of uncertainties that loom in the future that could wipe out civilization as we know it: a supervolcanic eruption at Yellowstone, an impact from a near-earth asteroid, a megatsunami in the Atlantic, etc. Does the mere existence of the slightest risk necessarily argue that we need to pump all of our resources into avoiding the worst-case scenario? Of course not. A better approach is to learn all you can about the process so you can make an informed decision.
By the way, this line of reasoning is not novel. Ever heard of "Pascal's wager"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager
Post a Comment
<< Home