Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nodrog
The problem is that (afaik) the data doesnt really establish any particular conclusion, so most people have just resorted to believing whatever it is they want to be true. It seems quite obvious to me that 90% of the pro-Kyoto arguments are motivated by a distrust of capitalism/America, and the most vocal supporters of generally tend to be those who also support various other anti-capitalist policies and movements. Its no real secret that environmentalists tend to march hand in hand with Marxists, opponents of the Iraq war, pro-Palestianians and supporters of other causes which are generally labelled as 'leftist. Even though these positions dont really have anything logical grouping them together, people who gravitate towards one generally tend to support all (or most) of them to some degree - its rare that you'll find someone who cheers for both Kyoto and the Iraq war, or who doesnt like America yet favours Israel over Palestine. Even taking a quick glance at the groups who joined up at the G8 protests makes it fairly clear where loyalties lie. But at the same time, those who strongly favour capitalism or state-'capitalism' seem to want to ignore any evidence put forwards that supports the 'humanity contributes to negative change' hypothesis, as if even admitting it could be valid is going to result in an overnight onslaught of government tyranny. I'm really glad that I'm not one of the people who actually has to sort through the mounds of bullshit and extract something sensible from it all.
|
Therefore carry on? The problem with this situation I see is the dichotomy between action and inaction. Either we are risking runaway damage to the environment or we aren't. if we merely assume that we aren't and turn out to be wrong, then we are quite literally stuffed. The fact that there is so much indecision amongst the very scientists who are supposed to be trying to answer the questions raises concerns. should we wait until we have a conclusive answer before action, or should we premeditate the conclusion by acting to shape up our act in the first place regarding our consumption of limited resources, regardless of the actual situation at hand?