Well, probably not…but it does add some nice flammable fuel to the theory.
Gary Stix has come out stating that articles that were written on climate change 6 years ago on how to reduce carbon emissions were a mistake, what they should have been writing about was how to control us
If I had it to do over, I’d approach the issue planning differently, my fellow editors permitting. I would scale back on the nuclear fusion and clean coal, instead devoting at least half of the available space for feature articles on psychology, sociology, economics and political science. Since doing that issue, I’ve come to the conclusion that the technical details are the easy part. It’s the social engineering that’s the killer. Moon shots and Manhattan Projects are child’s play compared to needed changes in the way we behave.
Riiiight, trying to set in place ways to modify our behaviour…rather than giving is the facts to disseminate for ourselves.
An article came out last week stating
“Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change. This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship.”
This article was “authored by several dozen scientists”
To be effective, a new set of institutions would have to be imbued with heavy-handed, transnational enforcement powers. There would have to be consideration of some way of embracing head-in-the-cloud answers to social problems that are usually dismissed by policymakers as academic naivete.
Heavy handed, transnational power! Did you see that part? What it’s saying is that this new ‘institution’ needs absolute power to bully policy makers into doing what they are told.
I have always thought that there has never been a good solid argument put before me, to convince me of a OWG…but this scientific opinion piece demonstrates how some can think it’s an inevitability.