Guernsey Press

This is science, not ‘madhouse effect’ religion... It’s real – and it’s not going to be at all convenient...

Matt Waterman’s letter (‘There is more to Extinction Rebellion than meets the eye,’ 9 July) and Stretch Kontelj’s opinion piece (‘A convenient emergency,’ 10 July) were at first surprising then... sadly predictable. However, they do give us the opportunity to go back to basics with the double emergency we’re facing.

Published
Last updated
Extinction Rebellion Guernsey's William Carter, left, and Rob Gregson. (24935284)

Firstly, that’s right, it’s not just climate change. Human activity has led to a rate of species loss 1,000 times higher than base level (we’re losing 150-200 species per day), which means we’re already in a mass extinction event. This alone is an emergency.

Readers will know that Matt likes a good conspiracy theory, but Stretch is a lawyer and a columnist for the Press. However, they’re both intelligent and thoughtful people... and both a bit gullible – they’ve both fallen for conspiracies, one imaginary but the other criminally real.

Humans are pattern spotters but can over-attribute events to hidden forces – and then stick to their theories once invested in them. In other words, conspiracy believers seek and latch on to patterns which don’t exist. Chemtrails and the 5G conspiracy are examples.

The real conspiracy isn’t as exciting as a shadowy elite trying to control us by spraying chemicals from planes or using military grade technology dubbed 5G. Neither is it a conspiracy of liberals trying to further their socialist agenda using a ‘convenient emergency’.

The conspiracy that has led to people like Stretch to disbelieve in science goes back to the 1980s, but it wasn’t motivated by a megalomaniac James Bond villain. It’s all a bit more prosaic – the motivations were greed and fear. Evidence has recently emerged that ExxonMobil knew about and believed the evidence that human activity was dangerously influencing the climate, yet not only did they fail to act, they agreed with other oil companies to start a PR campaign to discredit the science – real science which incidentally was accepted 30 years ago by the politicians of the time, including Margaret Thatcher and George Bush Sr.

The science is fairly commonsensical – over the last million years, the climate stabilised in a range of about 170-300 parts of CO2 per billion (by volume). This stability allowed life on the planet to bloom and eventually to provide conditions stable enough to allow an intelligent species of ape to prosper and grow into self-awareness and to develop a power based upon science, which gave it increasing control over its environment.

That intelligent ape came to rely on fossil fuels to power its industry to provide economic growth. It reached a point where it extracted and burnt billions of tons of combustible carbon compounds from underground every year. By doing so, it increased CO2 by about 50% to over 410 parts per million over the course of 200 years. It turns out that doing so destabilises the climate in a way that threatens the viability of life on earth. Yes, it’s only 0.04% of the atmosphere (the figure quoted in Stretch Kontelj’s column) – but it has a big impact.

The oil companies knew they were messing up the planet but were rightly afraid that taking action to stop doing so would be bad for their business models. Instead they let greed rule and set about casting doubt upon the science – and they did it well. They had plenty of money to throw at the project and found out that thousands of man years of rigorous scientific research could be negated in public opinion by seeking out and drawing undue attention to a few contradictory papers largely backed by scientists for hire. People were lazy – they liked their increasing standards of living and didn’t want to have to change – it was an easy sell.

It’s probably the biggest PR con in history and the oil companies don’t even need to do it any more – they can leave it up to well-intentioned but misguided people who pride themselves on challenging ‘accepted wisdom’.

Stretch, Matt – we are in an emergency. Your personal evidence doesn’t stack up against the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, who tell us that we have around 12 years in which to act to avoid catastrophic climate change and to tackle species loss otherwise the future of our civilisation is in danger.

The doubters cast doubt upon the messengers but no, the IPCC is not another part of the conspiracy. It is a global scientific body that is presenting us with independently commissioned, independently performed, peer-reviewed science.

Life is set to become very much harder for us and the longer we fail to act, the harder it will be – not for you, Stretch and Matt, but for the next generation and the generation after that.

This is science, not ‘madhouse effect’ religion. It’s real – and it’s not going to be at all convenient.

The time frame is tens of years, not thousands like previous climate changes. Life cannot adapt that fast – instead it will just die.

Guernsey’s contribution is small but disproportionately large per person. We should set an example and get ahead of the game by starting to build a post-carbon economy now.

Yes, we have the resources to look after the poor and vulnerable.

Yes, we do need an effort like that of the Second World War, but there’s no central bad guy like Hitler this time – this time we are all to blame to some extent. Which makes it harder.

Specifics? Yes, agreed: sustainability, not just in the long term but in the short term. Plastic-free oceans – absolutely. Stopping deforestation? Yes, in fact let’s start rewilding. Circular economy? Let’s get on with it. Electric vehicles – yes. Even better, let’s walk and cycle more or use the bus.

Matt, Stretch – you are good men. Put aside your personal theories, find out about the science and get on board. Your planet needs you.