PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet TERRA 4/2002 - 13 September 2002
--------------------------------------
"A 15-year study of ancient Antarctic ice has challenged
prevailing
theories about the process of climate change, a scientist
involved in
the research said Friday. Their findings, to be published this
week
in the journal Science, appear to contradict prevailing theories
that past climate change in Antarctica was triggered by change in
the
Northern Hemisphere. Researchers said the findings underscored
our
lack of understanding of the exact mechanisms behind climate
change and
would force a rethink of computer models used to predict future
environmental shifts."
--Space Daily, 13 September 2002
(1) MORE TROUBLE FOR CLIMATE MODELS: ANCIENT ANTARCTIC ICE
CHALLENGES
CLIMATE CHANGE THEORIES
Space Daily, 13 September 2002
(2) TREE-RING WIDTHS IN BRAZIL RESPOND TO SOLAR FORCING OF
CLIMATE
CO2 Science Magazine, 11 September 2002
(3) WISE MAN BUILDS HIS HOUSE UPON THE WEB: IMPROVING HOUSING
COULD SAVE
LIVES
Nature Science Update, 13 September 2002
(4) ON SHIRKING OUR *REAL* ENVIRONMENTAL DUTIES
CO2 Science Magazine, 11 September 2002
(5) IN 1905 ...
www.John-Daly.com,
11 September 2002
(6) IT'S NEVER TOO LATE: BRITISH GOVERNMENT ORDER SCIENCE
COMMUNICATION STUDY
Department of Trade and Industry, 10 September
2002
(7) EARTH SUMMIT ENDORSES ROLE OF SPACE
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(8) AND FINALLY: GREEN MISANTHROPISTS PROMOTE VOLUNTARY HUMAN
EXTINCTION
American Council on Science and Health, 9
September 2002
=========
(1) MORE TROUBLE FOR CLIMATE MODELS: ANCIENT ANTARCTIC ICE
CHALLENGES
CLIMATE CHANGE THEORIES
>From Space Daily, 13 September 2002
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/020913015032.parqllhi.html
SYDNEY (AFP) Sep 13, 2002
A 15-year study of ancient Antarctic ice has challenged
prevailing theories
about the process of climate change, a scientist involved in the
research
said Friday.
The Australian-French project involved scientists drilling
through 90,000
years of compacted Antarctic snow over a six-year period and then
analyzing
the ice core they recovered for a further nine years.
Their findings, to be published this week in the journal Science,
appear to
contradict prevailing theories that past climate change in
Antarctica was
triggered by change in the Northern Hemisphere.
Tas van Ommen, one of the study's authors, said information
gleaned from
Antarctic ice dating back about 14,500 years had shown a
different sequence
of global climate change at the time than previously thought.
At that time, Greenland abruptly starting warming while
Antarctica's
temperature also changed, although more gradually.
Earlier study of that period using less precise dating techniques
had put
the Antarctic change after Greenland's, leading to widely held
theories that
the southern climate shift was a response to that happening in
the north.
"Using our better dating, we found that the Antarctic change
occurred before
the abrupt Greenland jump by as much as 500 years and so could
not be a
response at all," Van Ommen told the Australian Associated
Press.
The new study indicates Antarctica could be the real driver of
climate
change or that changes in the two hemispheres are not connected
at all, said
Van Ommen, a senior research scientist at the Australian
Antarctic Division
and the Antarctic Cooperative Research Center.
Researchers said the findings underscored our lack of
understanding of the
exact mechanisms behind climate change and would force a rethink
of computer
models used to predict future environmental shifts.
"The fact that abrupt changes can occur in the climate
system raises
questions about climate stability, especially when forced by
humans via the
greenhouse effect," Van Ommen said, referring to theories
that global
warming is caused by man-made "greenhouse gases".
"For computer predictions of future climate to be reliable,
they must be
able to also reproduce changes in past climate like those probed
in this
study," he said.
The key to the new study was the recovery of the ice core, done
over a six
year period from 1987 at Placer Dome near Casey station in
Australian
Antarctic Territory.
The core, 10 centimeters (four inches) in diameter, was recovered
in two
meter (6.6-foot) lengths until bedrock was reached at a depth of
1.2
kilometers (.7 miles) and taken to Hobart, Tasmania, for study by
Australian
and French scientists.
Analyses of tens of thousands of samples provided a window on the
environment going back 19,000 years and, for the first time,
allowed tight
time scale synchronisation with core samples from Greenland.
"What it does show is that unravelling the climate is like
peeling layers
off an onion skin and the more we learn, the more we know we
don't know,"
Van Ommen said.
Earlier this week the release of a separate US study exposed
another flaw in
climate change models by showing that it was much colder in the
upper
atmosphere over the South Pole than previously believed.
Those findings will impact on computer models used to predict the
impact of
global warming caused by greenhouse gases, scientists said.
All rights reserved. © 2002 Agence France-Presse
===========
(2) TREE-RING WIDTHS IN BRAZIL RESPOND TO SOLAR FORCING OF
CLIMATE
>From CO2 Science Magazine, 11 September 2002
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2002/v5n37c2.htm
Reference
Rigozo, N.R., Nordemann, D.J.R., Echer, E., Zanandrea, A. and
Gonzalez, W.D.
2002. Solar variability effects studied by tree-ring data
wavelet analysis.
Advances in Space Research 29: 1985-1988.
What was done
Scientists frequently utilize tree-ring width and density data as
proxies to
reconstruct histories of climate (temperature and/or
precipitation) at
various locations around the globe when instrumental data are
unavailable.
In this study, the authors applied two statistical procedures -
wavelet
transform analysis and Morlet complex wavelet analysis - to two
data sets (a
set of tree-ring width measurements from the Santa Catarina State
of Brazil
and the sunspot number time series) in an attempt to determine
the influence
of the solar parameter (sun spot number) on climate (tree-ring
width) over
the period 1837-1996.
What was learned
The complex Morlet wavelet analysis revealed the existence of an
11-year
cycle in the tree-ring width data. Not surprisingly, an
11-year cycle was
also found in the sun spot data. When comparing both data
sets via
cross-wavelet spectral analysis, the authors report that "a
good
correspondence is observed," which correspondence is
strongest during the
time of most intense solar activity, i.e., 1940-1970.
What it means
Once again, the influence of the sun on earth's climate leading
up to and
throughout the initial stage of the Modern Warm Period is
demonstrated.
Copyright © 2002. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===============
(3) WISE MAN BUILDS HIS HOUSE UPON THE WEB: IMPROVING HOUSING
COULD SAVE
LIVES
>From Nature Science Update, 13 September 2002
http://www.nature.com/nsu/020909/020909-11.html
Online encyclopedia aims to make homes earthquake-proof.
13 September 2002
JOHN WHITFIELD
A growing online encyclopedia of houses in earthquake-prone areas
should
help engineers to make buildings safer.
In an earthquake, houses suffer more damage than other structures
because
they are often built using cheap materials and shoddy methods.
"There can be
huge loss of life," says Marjorie Greene of the Earthquake
Engineering
Research Institute (EERI) in Oakland, California. "Improving
housing could
make a big difference."
To encourage engineers to make these improvements, the EERI,
along with the
International Association of Earthquake Engineering, last month
launched an
encyclopedia of the world's housing structures. Efforts to gather
and
distribute the information started in early 2000.
The encyclopedia now describes nearly 80 types of house in 30
countries,
Greene told the European Conference on Earthquake Engineering in
London this
week. Dwellings listed range from mud huts in Malawi to tower
blocks in
Chile.
Each entry details the building's architecture, materials and
construction -
including any earthquake-proofing. It also describes the houses'
cost,
insurance, how well they hold together in earthquakes, and what
type of
damage they sustain.
This information is otherwise hard to come by. There is a book
encyclopedia
of the world's vernacular architecture, but it costs US$900 - the
new online
encyclopedia is free. All the reports are written by volunteers,
and are
reviewed before publication.
About 150 people already use the encyclopedia each day.
"People are using it
to see how similar buildings are constructed in other
countries," says
Greene. An engineer in Malawi, for example, has tapped into
Indian
expertise.
Over the next 2-3 years, the number of entries should rise to
around 150,
says EERI vice-president Svetlana Brzev. At the moment the
encyclopedia
lacks houses from such quake-stricken countries as Japan and
Mexico.
© Nature News Service / Macmillan Magazines Ltd 2002
==============
(4) ON SHIRKING OUR *REAL* ENVIRONMENTAL DUTIES
>From CO2 Science Magazine, 11 September 2002
http://www.co2science.org/edit/v5_edit/v5n37edit.htm
It is currently fashionable to cast the ongoing rise in the air's
CO2
content as the greatest threat, though yet future, ever to be
faced by the
biosphere. It is also fashionable to claim we must do now
whatever it
takes, at whatever the price, to stop the historical upward trend
in the
concentration of this supposedly diabolical constituent of the
atmosphere.
Representatives of the nations of the earth, for example, meet
regularly to
consider the issue and talk of the moral imperative we have to do
something
about it. But as they tilt at this greatest of all
environmental issues
ever to be created by the mind of man - for it is by no means
clear that it
is, or ever will be, a bone fide problem in the real world - they
weaken our
chances of successfully dealing with a host of environmental
problems that
truly do vex us and are literally crying out for attention.
In an editorial in the 9 August 2002 issue of Science magazine
entitled
"Science and Sustainability," for example, Leshner
(2002) reports the
following: "One billion people throughout the world have no
access to clean
water. Two billion people have inadequate sanitation. Almost 1.5
billion
people, mostly in cities in the developing world, are breathing
air below
the standards deemed acceptable by the World Health
Organization." And a
few pages later, in the very same issue, Raven (2002) describes
how
mankind's usurpation of the planet's land area is proceeding at
such a rate
that by the end of the century it will have caused the extinction
of fully
two-thirds of the ten million or so other species currently found
on the
earth.
Where in the world are our priorities? We agonize over a future
*hypothetical* scenario - catastrophic CO2-induced global warming
- that
many knowledgeable scientists are convinced will never occur,
while billions
of people suffer from a host of very *real* health hazards in the
here and
now. And superimposed upon our problems is the great species
extinction
event for which we are responsible, which doubly damns us.
Do we divert our attention from these serious situations and
focus it
elsewhere because we do not know the causes of our current
problems? Or do
we neglect them because their solutions are so complex? If either
of these
reasons is correct, why should anyone give the governments of the
world a
mandate to totally restructure human society to fight a
hypothetical problem
of vastly greater complexity that may ultimately be found to have
nothing
whatsoever to do with its imputed cause? And if these reasons are
not
correct, there is even less justification for trusting those who
would have
us look upon CO2 as the devil incarnate; for what else could
possibly
justify our not confronting these important issues with all due
haste and
every modern tool we have at our disposal? Are more devious
forces possibly
at work here? Or is our morality not even skin-deep, but
worn only on our
sleeves?
Whatever the answers to these disturbing questions might be, it
is clear
that the current brouhaha over atmospheric CO2 and potential
climate change
has relegated all of the very real environmental concerns of our
day to
second- and third-class issues. This situation is truly
regrettable; for
unless these more immediate and weighty matters are forthrightly
addressed
in a timely manner, whatever earth's climate may do in the future
will be
pretty much a moot point, especially for the millions of species
of plants
and animals that will have suffered extinction in the interim, as
well as
the billions of human beings that will have died prematurely, all
as a
consequence of environmental problems wholly unrelated to the
air's CO2
content that could have been resolved but weren't.
Will this sad ending be the legacy of those who are determined to
bring an
end to the Age of Fossil Fuels? Very possibly. And
unless we do something
to stop the unscientific slandering of carbon dioxide, it will be
our legacy
too.
Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso
References
Leshner, A. 2002. Science and sustainability.
Science 297: 897.
Raven, P.H. 2002. Science, sustainability, and the
human prospect.
Science 297: 954-959.
Copyright © 2002. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
=============
(5) IN 1905 ...
>From www.John-Daly.com,
11 September 2002
In 1905, a July heat wave in New York killed around 100 people.
In 1905, a yellow fever epidemic afflicted New Orleans, and
reached as far
north as Indiana. Yellow fever is a tropical disease.
In 1905, there were severe summer storms and flooding in Ireland.
In 1905, on 1st September, the town of Algonquin, Illinois,
recorded its all
time highest temperature either before or since, - 117°F.
In 1905, the Artic sea ice had receded so far that explorer Roald
Amundsen
was able to traverse the Northwest Passage in a ship in uncharted
waters,
the first person to do so.
In 1905, CO2 and other greenhouse gases were at or near their
pre-industrial
level.
1905 and 2002 do share one unique thing in common. Both are El
Niño years,
and both are solar maximum years. The conjunction of El Niño and
Solar
Maximum (both tending to warm the planet) is rare, and 1905 was
the last
such occasion until this year.
More 1905 weather events here (http://www.john-daly.com/1905.txt)
Just something to think about when reading the next weather
headline.
============
(6) IT'S NEVER TOO LATE: BRITISH GOVERNMENT ORDER SCIENCE
COMMUNICATION STUDY
>From Department of Trade and Industry, 10 September 2002
http://www.nds.coi.gov.uk/coi/coipress.nsf/4eb388ccc4bff3e880256bf4003360fb/3ce2d6ab9814df8680256c30003aff94?OpenDocument
The British Association has today been asked by Science Minister
Lord
Sainsbury to conduct a study looking at how Government should
receive advice
on science communication policy and activities from other
organisations.
Lord Sainsbury said:
"In general the UK public are very supportive of scientific
research and
recognise the benefits that it brings to the economy, healthcare
and
society. But we need today, in a period of rapid scientific
advances, a more
effective dialogue between scientists and the public.
"We have moved decisively away from the era in which it was
enough for
science communicators simply to educate the public about science
and its
benefits. What is needed now is an effective two-way dialogue and
debate
between those who do scientific research and the public.
"There are a great number of scientific organisations and
individuals who
are involved in science communication. Only some of them receive
direct
funding from Government. This study will recommend how Government
can assess
whether these activities, taken together, meet the needs of the
public and
the science community, and how science communicators can best
co-ordinate
their activities."
As part of the study the British Association will consult with a
wide
cross-section of those involved in science communication
including
representatives of the public and will report back to Lord
Sainsbury by the
end of October. Lord May, President of the Royal Society, said:
"The Royal Society welcomes this timely study and will be
playing a full
part in it. As our own Science and Society programme has found,
the public
has a huge interest in science and the issues that it raised for
society,
and we all have a role in making sure that their needs are being
met by the
activities of the science communication community as a
whole."
Baroness Greenfield, Director of the Royal Institution, said:
"Any initiative advancing a more effective dialogue between
scientists and
the public is to be welcomed"
Professor Colin Blakemore, Chairman of the British Association,
said:
"The BA is delighted to be carrying out this study on behalf
of the science
communication community, and we shall do it openly and
inclusively."
Notes to Editors
1. The British Association is a nationwide organisation with an
open
membership, dedicated to the communication and appreciation of
science. It
embraces all areas of science, forging links between them and
working with
them to communicate, discuss and promote all aspects of science
and its
influence on our lives.
2. The Prime Minister in a recent speech on science to the Royal
Society
said: "We need better, stronger, clearer ways of science and
people
communicating. The dangers are in ignorance of each other's point
of view;
the solution is understanding them. We need, therefore, a robust,
engaging
dialogue with the public. We need to re-establish trust and
confidence in
the way that science can demonstrate new opportunities, and offer
new
solutions."
3. The study commissioned by OST will start informally at the
British
Association Festival of Science at Leicester University this
week. Its aim
is to recommend the processes the government should put in place
by the
beginning of next year to ensure that the science and society
agenda is
being properly addressed in the UK. The key issues it will cover
are:
- what is going on - how the government can obtain an adequate
overview of
the activities of all the main organisations in the science and
society
community;
- how effective is it - how the government can best monitor
whether its
science and society programmes and those of other providers are
meeting the
needs of the various audiences and stakeholders, offering quality
and value
for money, achieving critical mass and identifying
where there are gaps or duplications;
- coordination in the community - the organisation of regular
forums at
which the community including both providers and consumers, can
discuss, for
example, coordination of their activities, evaluation of their
activities
and recommendations for action and change; and,
- governance of government's own science and society programmes -
how best
should OST and DTI manage the oversight and direction of the
activities it
funds directly.
Public Enquiries: 020 7215 5000
Textphone for those with hearing impairments: 020 7215 6740
Internet: www.dti.gov.uk
==============
(7) EARTH SUMMIT ENDORSES ROLE OF SPACE
>From Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
ESA News
http://www.esa.int
9 September 2002
Summit endorses role of space
Although there is some controversy surrounding the outcome of
last week's
summit on sustainable development there is one subject on which
all
delegates were unanimous: the important
role that Earth observation satellites can play in assisting
sustainable
development.
The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) 54-page Plan
of
Implementation contains more than 10 specific references to Earth
observation, clearly demonstrating that the Summit
recognised the importance of space technology for sustainable
development.
This success goes back to ESA, which -- in its role as CEOS Chair
--
delivered a number of official statements during the preparatory
meetings
and the Summit itself. Some of the statements delivered by ESA,
on behalf of
CEOS, were also followed by supporting interventions by national
delegations
to CEOS, such as Japan and the USA.
ESA staff had a busy but rewarding week, as this year ESA is
chair of CEOS
and co-chair of IGOS, the Integrated Global Observing Strategy
partnership.
José Achache, ESA Director of Earth Observation, addressed the
plenary
session of the Summit on behalf of these organisations. ESA staff
also
participated in a number of meetings and discussions on the use
of satellite
data at Ubuntu Village in Johannesburg, where ESA also had a
stand.
Two important WSSD partnership initiatives concerning Earth
observation data
were launched during the week: the first by IGOS concerning the
use of space
and ground measurements for sustainable development; and the
second by CEOS
to encourage partnership on education and training in Earth
observation.
Both of these measures aim to widen the use of Earth observation
data to
protect the environment, particularly in developing countries,
and to ensure
that this data is available to all.
To follow up on the action taken at the Summit, a high-level
meeting has
been arranged for 19 November at ESRIN, ESA's space research
institute in
Frascati, Italy. Here, government ministers, UN representatives
and heads of
space agencies will decide on how best to use satellite data to
support
sustainable development.
When asked about the Summit José Achache replied: "In Rio,
heads of states
achieved agreement on high level political declarations but with
little
underlying ground work. In contrast, Johannesburg did not lead to
a strong
political consensus but initiated many concrete actions and
partnerships."
"Earth observation for space achieved a level of visibility
and recognition
at the Summit that has never before been achieved in such a
forum."
"ESA is already contemplating the launch of a concrete
initiative to support
sustainable development and capacity building in developing
countries, by
the joint use of Earth observation and telecom satellites,
particularly
Envisat and Artemis."
=============
(8) AND FINALLY: GREEN MISANTHROPISTS PROMOTE VOLUNTARY HUMAN
EXTINCTION
>From American Council on Science and Health, 9 September 2002
http://healthfactsandfears.com/editors_rants/learning/2002/misanthropy090902.html
Green Misanthropy, (John) Gray Misanthropy
By Todd Seavey
What are we to make of green activists who oppose electricity and
want most
of humanity to remain poor?
What are we to make of green activists who would rather see
Zambia face
starvation than let people eat genetically-modified crops?
What are we to make of green activists who promote
"voluntary human
extinction"?
Finally, what are we to make of a philosopher who once held
libertarian,
pro-capitalist views, later held anti-capitalist and
anti-globalization
views, and has finally denounced humanity as a plague upon the
Earth, openly
longing for our destruction as the only solution to environmental
problems?
Calling them all evil might be oversimplifying. A friend of mine,
Critical
Review editor Jeffrey Friedman, insists that there are no evil
people. He
points out that political activists love to paint their opponents
as evil
but that usually their opponents just sincerely disagree about
how to make
the world a better place. No one, the argument goes, does what he
does
because he woke up in the morning thinking, "How can I make
the world, on
balance, a worse place?"
I think Friedman is wrong to say no one thinks this way, since
there are at
least a few bullies, sadistic murderers, violent Satanists, and
gang members
eager to prove how bad they are. These people are evil in the
classic sense
of the word. But the case of well-meaning political zealots is a
more
interesting one. If someone genuinely believes that blowing up an
airplane
will, in the long run, make the world a better place, might we
say that
person - despite making a terrible, disastrous error in judgment
(and
deserving whatever retaliation he gets) - is not evil?
Perhaps, but we are within our rights to inquire further about
what "a
better world" means in such a person's mind and whether he
has been morally
responsible in thinking that vision through. If his goal is a
world of
peace, happiness, and prosperity for all, we might be willing to
concede he
is not evil in the classic, villainous sense of the term - though
we'll
still happily shoot him (and so would Friedman, I should note -
ultimately
we both care more about consequences than intentions). If, on the
other
hand, the zealot's vision of "a better world" is one in
which, to paraphrase
Osama bin Laden, "the world runs red with the blood of
infidels," it is fair
to ask whether this in any meaningful way constitutes "good
intentions" -
though the zealot's desire to secure salvation and eternal joy
for all the
non-infidels means that even butchery may be an attempt (albeit a
failed
one) to do good.
However, it would be naive to think that classically evil motives
never
intermingle with people's stated good intentions. The zealot may
have become
a zealot in the first place in part because he loves to kill.
Someone might
embrace the anti-moral philosophy of Nietzsche in large part
because he's
eager to rationalize shoplifting and vandalism, hobbies he loved
long before
reading Beyond Good and Evil. Similarly, a Marxist acquaintance
of mine and
other left-wing activists recently had a rumble with neo-Nazis in
Washington, D.C. (think of it as a re-enactment of Weimar
political
violence) - and while my friend went mostly out of a sincere
desire to
oppose fascism, surely he went in part because he enjoys a good
fistfight.
So "good intentions" can be a veneer over nasty,
misanthropic, sadistic
motives.
And that brings us back to the various green activists I
mentioned at the
beginning.
When an activist such as Gar Smith, webzine editor for the Earth
Island
Institute (the group that worked to save the "Free
Willy" whale), says
"There is a lot of quality to be had in poverty" and
complains that
electricity is "destroying" primitive cultures by
bringing them media and
machines and raising their standard of living, should we regard
him as
well-meaning? According to a report by CNSNews.com, Smith says,
"I don't
think a lot of electricity is a good thing. It is the fuel that
powers a lot
of multi-national imagery."
When the president of Zambia says his nation would "rather
starve" than
accept genetically-modified crops - and imminent famine creates
the
possibility that Zambia may one day face that very choice -
should we view
the anti-biotech activists who created this situation as
compassionate
people? Should we listen with sympathy to the hecklers who
interrupted Colin
Powell at the Johannesburg Earth Summit when he defended
Zimbabwean property
rights and American biotech? U.S. AID Administrator Andrew
Natsios,
according to the Washington Times, is one man who is no longer
willing to
give the anti-biotech activists the benefit of the doubt. He now
openly
criticizes them as obstacles to famine relief. Leftists may soon
be forced
to decide which they hate more, famine or technology, and the
answer will
speak volumes about whether their vaunted compassion is really
misanthropy
in disguise. (One precedent that makes optimism difficult is
environmentalists' support for the ban on DDT, a ban that has
cost millions
of lives.)
When the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement calls for all humans
to stop
breeding so that humanity vanishes from the Earth - for the sake
of Gaia -
they at least do so with some humor, but is it unreasonable to
think that
there may be some good, old-fashioned misanthropy (with which any
intelligent person can sympathize) underlying their ostensible
concern for
trees and ecosystems? In the grand scheme of things, if even a
species as
impressive as humanity doesn't matter, what ultimately makes
trees and
ecosystems so important?
Is it possible that many of these green activists are simply
growing weary
of decades of disguising a deep hatred of their fellow humans as
a deep
concern for nature?
Philosopher John Gray was once more-or-less libertarian but is
now the
civilization-despising author of Straw Dogs, in which he argues
that
humanity is inherently destructive and predatory and that we
should hope the
"plague" of humans will eventually vanish from the
Earth, enabling it to
recover from its metaphorical illness. Helene Guldberg, in her
Spiked-Online
review of the book, notes that Gray laments the introduction of
agriculture
some 10,000 years ago as an attack on nature, while Guldberg
counters that
we should "celebrate the birth of agriculture...for marking
the start of
human civilization." In adopting his anti-agro view, Gray,
previously a
hardcore conservative (at least for a few years after his more
libertarian
phase) has reached a reactionary reductio ad absurdum: He has
come to hate
modern society so much that he joins the environmentalist
radicals of Earth
First! in longing to go "back to the Pleistocine!"
(There are times when one
suspects that all the world's fanatical causes are basically
interchangeable, as when the Palestinian spokesman at the Earth
Summit used
all of his time to condemn Israel instead of touting
environmentalism.)
We live in strange times when a conservative is echoing radical
environmentalists, while Guldberg, part of the Marxist crowd
associated with
Spiked-Online and the Institute of Ideas, sticks up for Western
civilization, industry, and science (actually, Marx himself, who
admired
progress and condemned the "idiocy" of rural life,
probably would have
approved, but nowadays Guldberg and company's sentiments make
them unusual
on the left). The Australian philosopher Chandran Kukathas
suggested a
decade ago, when Gray first began toying with extreme
conservative and
environmentalist views, that Gray should be labeled
"blue-green" (in keeping
with the European practice of calling leftists red, conservatives
blue, and
environmentalists green). Brian Micklethwait argues on
Samizdata.net that
Gray is just a grouchy pessimist and always has been.
And people should be allowed to be grouchy pessimists, even
grouchy
misanthropes who wish humanity would vanish. But if those are the
sorts of
motives that underlie their manifestos against biotech corn and
their
protests against multinational agriculture companies, we probably
shouldn't
delude ourselves into thinking they have the public good in mind
when they
make policy recommendations. It may be time to stop
philosophizing with the
greens and start psychoanalyzing them in much the same way that
we do other
hate groups.
If you wish to respond to this editorial please email your
comments to
forum@acsh.org. Also, visit
the ACSH FORUMS at www.acsh.org/forum/.
Copyright © 1997-2002 American Council on Science and Health
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk
>. Information
circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use
only. The
attached information may not be copied or reproduced
forany other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders. The
fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on, can be
found at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions,
beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the articles and texts and in
other
CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
beliefs and
viewpoints of the moderator of this network.