Sunday, March 22, 2009

But... do we get a big answer?

The Big Question: Does an impending shortage of vital resources threaten catastrophe?

Well, I am all for balance, but we end up with six.... 3 each way:

Will we be living in a dystopian nightmare world within 20 years?

Yes...

* By 2030 we may lack about 50 per cent of the food and energy we need to sustain everyone on the planet

* Millions of people may have been displaced from their homes and nations by water shortages

* It is more than conceivable that critical shortages of resources will lead to global instability and war

No...

* Don't take scientists' scare tactics too seriously. By overstating their concerns, they receive more funding

* A raft of technological advances and efficiency savings will ensure that the worst aspects of climate change are ameliorated

* We will certainly not become extinct – nature always finds a way

I merely note, especially as this is a climate pessimistic, action proactive paper, that the qualifiers 'may' seem to crop up in one section more, and not the one I'd imagined.

2 comments:

  1. Another thought-proving post Peter. I enjoy your eyebrow-cranking approach. Makes me feel like I'm in safe hands.

    On a separate note - I've got an award waiting for you ref the Junkk.com work that you do....do pop over to the blog and see if you can find it. It's not far down, but it is in appreciation of the impact that you've had on me.

    All the best. Karen :-D

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you. I will try and live up to such trust. But if I get it wrong (and I do... will...), I trust you, and others, to help me... help others... by getting things as factual, objective, and accurate as it all can be.

    Ta for the award. And beyond this, the words you pen (key) here mean more than you know.

    A definite 'big upping, mutual backslapping' post here soon.

    Speaking of time management, I owe you a reply very soon on your new project. It's highlighted in green (how appropriate) with flags and stars in my inbox. Monday... promise:)

    Mind you, I rather feel like I am in danger of becoming the eco-world's Jeremy Clarkson, and not in a good way... at least for potential flames on this blog!

    ReplyDelete

I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.

Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.

I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.