On Friday, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis – Summary for Policymakers (PDF) was published. The media are going crazy, but I read it and found no predictions of forthcoming catastrophe. A rise in temperature of between 1.8C and 4C and a rise in sea levels of between 0.18 and 0.59 metres, by the year 2100. And most of the media are still not interested in the idea that adapting to such changes and industrializing the whole world are the wisest things to do. One of the Working Groups of the IPCC is looking into this kind of adaptation, but it doesn’t get the publicity that the mitigation-orientated Working Group III does. It’s natural that they run with the horror stories.
There’s a fascinating analysis of the summary report and the surrounding fuss at spiked. It’s very useful for putting the document into context. The media are describing it as the work of 600, 1200 or 2500 scientists, depending on what you read. This is misleading, for various reasons.
I heard Clive James on Radio 4 a couple of days ago, in A Point of View. I had forgotten just how brilliant he is. This short piece, with erudition, humour and self-deprecation mixed with deeply-felt liberal values, is dazzling. I’d encourage anyone to read it, and the audio’s on the site as well. Anyway, here are some of his serious points:
“There are good reasons for cleaning up the mess we make, but finally it’s what we make that makes us an advanced culture, and only a highly developed industry knows how to keep itself clean.
We shouldn’t expect the less fortunate nations to cut themselves off from industrial progress in the name of a green planet.
It wouldn’t be fair even if it was likely, and anyway, we aren’t civilized by the extent to which we return to nature, only by the extent that we overcome it.”