The difference between Science and Climate Policy is often misunderstood, as revealed by U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. This revelation is featured in the NBC News article COP30 climate deal increases money to countries hit by climate change, but no explicit fossil fuel plan.
Referring to the United Nations’ COP30 climate summit, NBC News quotes Guterres saying, “I cannot pretend that COP30 has delivered everything that is needed. The gap between where we are and what science demands remains dangerously wide.”
What Science demands?
This blogger imagines Star Trek’s Mr. Spock looking at Guterres like this
and saying to him, “Sir, Science does not demand anything. Science tells us what is, why it is and what will happen under certain conditions.”
Science tells us that anthropogenic climate change is real (what is), is caused by greenhouse gas emissions (why it is) and will persist under current global conditions (what will happen under certain conditions).
However, Science does not dictate how Humans are to respond to climate change. Directions pertaining to what to do and when to do it are under the purview of policy makers.
Indeed, policy makers are tasked with responding to the demands of the Human race no matter what Science reveals.
What we might want to do, then, is to figure out if the demands of the Human race are logical.
Consider the following statement from the website Our World in Data:
- “For most of human history, the global population was a tiny fraction of what it is today. Over the last few centuries, the human population has gone through an extraordinary change. In 1800, there were one billion people. Today there are more than 8 billion of us.”
For the sake of argument, suppose that, at a global level, anthropogenic climate change didn’t exist when the Human population was “a tiny fraction” of its current size. Also, suppose that, as U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres claims, Science makes demands.
What if Science revealed that shrinking the Human population to its pre-1800s size would eliminate anthropogenic climate change at a global level?
If such were the case, then would it be far-fetched to conclude that Science “demands” a shrinkage of the Human population? What if Science “demanded” that the Human population be the size it was before anthropogenic climate change began?
If Science “demanded” that, then how would people like U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres respond?
Would they agree to supply what Science allegedly demands? This blogger doubts it.
No, this blogger is not saying a variation of Malthusianism is correct. Instead, he is saying that climate policy is based on what Humans want, not on what Science reveals.
The “Wanted” posters say the following about David: “Wanted: A refugee from planet Melmac masquerading as a human. Loves cats. If seen, contact the Alien Task Force.”