Liberty Alone

There are two things to fear from climate change.
Firstly the changes in the environment and the effects they have. This is what most people focus on.
Secondly the political uses to which fear of climate change is being put. This is far more worrying to me, much of the rhetoric is centred around authoritarianism.

Too much of the debate on climate change is focused upon hysteria and bad science in the media. The debate is framed as ‘greens’ vs ‘deniers’. This polarises the debate and prevents good science, which flourishes upon vigorous debate and the falsification of models.

A classic example is the IPCC report which says that climate change is driven by human action, but has also reduced its estimates of the effects of climate change. The press report this as being final and we’re all doomed, something which the report does not claim.
It is a scientific report, it is not final, it is not certain. The evidence is still being collected, new models are being developed, the science is not finished, it never is. The effects may be more or less than those the report suggests, but the latest evidence as presented by the report suggests smaller effects than were previously thought of.
The media, and the green movement however will not countenance any scientific debate. Witness the fuss over the AEI offering money for scientists to write essays on climate change policy and studies of what models are effective. This could run counter to the received wisdom, so was jumped upon as Exxon Mobil offering money to scientists to deny climate change (the fact that this is not what was asked and that Exxon Mobil didn’t appear to have had any influence in this is apparently besides the point). You are now not allowed to criticise the received wisdom of catastrophy.

Scarily, the green movement doesn’t even seem to take notice of the content of reports like the IPCC’s report. Localism is a great cry of the greens, anti-globalisation is their staple, and anti-technology rhetoric is common. Both the IPCC and Stern however report that the best scenario is to increase the amount of globalisation and innovation whilst a regression to localism would in fact produce worse climate change.
This doesn’t stop the green movement claiming the opposite however. Ideology seems to be trumping science.

So many suggestions for solutions rest upon collectivist principles of state control and authoritarianism. For our own good naturally. This is a dangerous trend, for us as well as the environment. The collectivist states in the past have had the worst effect on the environment and state intervention through restrictions led to the popularity of SUVs in the US - a measure to help the environment ended up harming it.

Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ has been lauded as a great film, yet its scientific basis is suspect at best. Peer review played no part. Yet there is no criticism of it because of that.
Greenpeace is not criticised for hiring scientists to promote its views, why should other organisations be criticised for that? Its not as though other scientists will not review the research and criticise it.
It reminds me of Galileo. He made some claims which went against received wisdom and he was persecuted, however he was correct. Others have made claims against the received wisdom and they were disproved and lie mostly forgotten.

We desperately need sensible debate about the science and the policy, for the planets sake and for our own sakes and those of our children.
Climate change does present a massive challenge, but hysteria, one-sidedness and hyperbole do not help, only sensible debate can.

We must not let concern for the environment or fear of climate change lead us to authoritarianism in the same way concern about poverty did with socialism, or the way this government is attempting to with fear of terrorism. We must stand by our freedom and liberty and promote good environmental measures which are compatible with them.

Green liberalism is about sensible debate and refusing to give up our freedoms whilst sharing a concern for the environment. It is not about caving in to fear and repression. We must develop a truly liberal response to climate change, one which leaves people free to act and live their lives without repression and without fear.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.