On the tenth day... Ten Lords a Leaping
Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:02:00 GMT
The Rio Earth Summit in 1992 placed climate change on the mainstream political agenda for the first time. The implications of a warming climate were understood and accepted by almost all of the 172 governments represented at the summit, and one of the key outcomes was the setting up of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. There have been regular follow up conferences, with the 21st being held this week in Paris, aiming to get agreement on how to limit warming to 2C. We will find out in the next few days how successful this latest meeting has been, but whatever the outcome, it begs the question -‘if we knew all this stuff 23 years ago, why haven’t we done something about it?’
This is not an easy question to answer as there are many political, economic, and social issues that have hindered our collective progress, but one very important issue that underpins much of our global inaction is uncertainty.
Our understanding of climate science is drawn largely from computer modelling, and that is by its nature, an imprecise tool. After all, we are looking into the future, and any future gazing, however scientifically robust, is still speculative and uncertain - only a time traveller can tell us exactly what the future is going to look like! For over twenty years this uncertainty has been exploited by climate change sceptics who argue that since we can’t know exactly what the future will look like we don’t need to spend unnecessary money on trying to find solutions to a problem that might not even exist.
Although 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations endorse this position, the sceptics have hardened their viewpoint and have become even more entrenched in their opinions. This might not matter were it not for two related issues – the high profile of some of these sceptics, and the resulting publicity they attract.
One of the most high profile and powerful climate change denier is Lord Nigel Lawson. Lord Lawson used to be the Chancellor of the Exchequer during the Thatcher era and his support for free markets and unregulated economies underpin his sceptical stance which has seen him describe efforts to reduce emissions as ‘wrongheaded’ and warnings about rising temperatures as ‘alarmist’. He established the Global Warming Policy Foundation which promulgates his ideas, which are often erroneously presented as science-based in some newspapers. Such mainstreaming of ill founded minority views is dangerous as it misleads the public, many of whom genuinely believe that there is no scientific consensus.
The media compound this misinformation by attempting to show balanced viewpoints when discussing climate change. This means that if they have one expert discussing the reality of anthropocentric climate change, they often have a sceptic giving the alternative view. In reality if the media want to show a balance, for every climate change sceptic given airtime, they should give allow 97 climate scientists to present their view - something that an American chat show host demonstrated
As a result of the sceptics and the biased media coverage the public can be forgiven for thinking that the problem is not proven, that there is a strong chance that the environmentalists are wrong, and that they can continue ‘business as usual’ . Lets face it, it is comforting to think like that – life would be so much better if we didn’t have to worry about climate change!
But we do – we need to beware of Lords leaping to wrong conclusions!
