Jamie Andrews

Let’s wait a bit before we save the planet

This morning I read an article on the Guardian entitled ‘Save the Planet. But maybe not right now’.

At first I thought that the article had some merit, but then I went back and read this comment, which made me laugh, and makes absolute sense, so I thought I’d reproduce it here:

As a scientist, a technologist and a lifelong optimist, can I take this opportunity to distance myself as remotely as possible from this abject nonsense. This is not in any way a useful or even coherent response to doom-mongering.
Does the adage “necessity is the mother of invention” mean anything to you, Mr. Wainwright? The problem is already understood and the ingenious solutions are already under way. Suggesting we should artificially delay this process to demonstrate our faith in the inventiveness of future generations is utterly barking. It shows no understanding of how scientific advance and invention happen. It shows no grasp (or admission) of the human capacity for prudence and revolution. It is scientifically illiterate and politically reactionary. It is a sop to people who want to deny the problem or want to shirk their responsibility for it. It bears no relation at all to McEwan’s optimism. It is a truly pishpoor piece of journalism.
Stick to romanticising the lake district. You are so far out of your depth here that the bubbles aren’t even visible from the surface.
As a scientist, a technologist and a lifelong optimist, can I take this opportunity to distance myself as remotely as possible from this abject nonsense. This is not in any way a useful or even coherent response to doom-mongering.
Does the adage “necessity is the mother of invention” mean anything to you, Mr. Wainwright? The problem is already understood and the ingenious solutions are already under way. Suggesting we should artificially delay this process to demonstrate our faith in the inventiveness of future generations is utterly barking. It shows no understanding of how scientific advance and invention happen. It shows no grasp (or admission) of the human capacity for prudence and revolution. It is scientifically illiterate and politically reactionary. It is a sop to people who want to deny the problem or want to shirk their responsibility for it. It bears no relation at all to McEwan’s optimism. It is a truly pishpoor piece of journalism.
Stick to romanticising the lake district. You are so far out of your depth here that the bubbles aren’t even visible from the surface.
I hope that the Comment is Free user GloriaMachinTruc doesn’t mind me posting this on my blog. I love a bit of passionate and precise criticism.

Activity

No comments, leave your comment or trackback.

Leave a Reply


Search

Feel free to search older content using topic keywords.

Browse by Category