by asdf
Thu Oct 25th, 2007 at 09:50:01 AM EST
Lost in the argumentation about the extent of climate change, or the rate, or whose fault it is, is the point that there are THREE sides to the argument. The first side is the "accepting" side, made up of the community of people who take the IPCC conclusions as a scientific concensus and want to take actions based on that view. The second side is the "denial" side, made up of people who confuse science with politics and want to base actions on wishful thinking.
The third side takes the "things are a lot worse than is widely acknowledged" view. Doomsayers and pessimists, mostly, who are gradually pulling the IPCC conclusions in the dismal direction.
One of them is James Lovelock, inventor of the Gaia theory (perhaps a bit on the questionable side?) and also inventor of the instrument used to detect the Ozone hole over the Antarctic. In the current issue of Rolling Stone magazine, his very, very pessimistic views get a good airing. Now I'm not sure whether the Rolling Stone counts as a part of the Mainstream Media (it does for a significant fraction of the American baby boom generation), but it is interesting to see that the "we're frigging doomed" conclusion is getting some press.
By 2100, Lovelock believes, the Earth's population will be culled from today's 6.6 billion to as few as 500 million, with most of the survivors living in the far latitudes -- Canada, Iceland, Scandinavia, the Arctic Basin.
Rolling Stone Magazine
