And thanks for the review of The Collapse of Western Civilization - I went and found a copy and read it. Terrifyingly graphic, and impressively researched.
A couple of observations - I reckon the authors put too much blame on scientists for failing to make people realise the facts. Were scientists at fault for ‘allowing’ Big Tobacco to delay significant govt action on smoking for decades?
The authors also make excuses for politicians as being ‘under the spell’ of false free market beliefs. Politicians by and large know exactly which side their bread is buttered on.
Interesting they posit that 300 years into the future we remain in vigorous discussion on whether, now, ‘decentralisation and redemocratisation’ may be considered. But no specific mention of the fate of capitalism. In the story it was the powerful centralised government of China that was able to take actions in the face of (an emergency). So maybe Trump is on the right track with his moves toward dictatorship! (No he’s not, I’m joking)
thanks Lachlan. I appreciate you standing up for us poor scientists. We're players, yes, but sometimes only bit players.
I was just listening to an interview with someone writing about the Middle East and they made the point that politicians and senior policy makers are generally very well informed and know exactly the 'facts', but almost all feel the personal risks of taking action are too great to overcome the uncertain gains. They went on to say that they changed tack in their writing, from trying to inform and persuade those specialists / elites, to trying to reach a broader audience, to create conditions where the the risks of action decline.
Yep. Reaching a broader audience is key, or if not broader, then at least differently targeted. Mass media of course is controlled by vested interests, and ditto social media (hence allowing mis and disinformation so all of it is treated with scepticism)(or else blindly believed!).
In TCOWC when they mentioned the entire populations of Australia and Africa were wiped out, my first thought was Oh I'm sure Gina Hancock and all folks of that ilk had comfortable escape strategies in place in plenty of time.
Quite disturbing. However, what the authors said governments achieved by silencing scientists via legislation, we have achieved either through ignoring them or denial.
if these points are the Black Score highlights, I can't wait to read the full text ... I think the editors made a hugh mistake leaving this out. The video footage will be be spectacular !
Combining history with future is a good 'genre', a bit like alternative history. I wonder what an alternative history/future version of Black Score could be ? (Yes, I know, I should try to write one before the sea reaches my front gate ...)
thanks Mike. us scientists are a slow lot, but it is gradually dawning on us that there may be merit in finding different ways of talking to people about what we do and just what the Dickens it might all mean
Whenever you are ready, we have a guest post slot waiting for you 😀
I like how this genre allows you to amp up the catastrophe without it feeling quite as confronting. It's like, some of this is clearly wrong, but we'll just go with it because it's like a movie.
thanks David. It's certainly a distinctive genre, a little more up my alley than the burgeoning field of climate fiction. It would be interesting to get a similar version of this from other fire scientists around the world, find out where the areas of agreement and disagreement are (typical scientist, obsessed with quantifying uncertainty!). If we did this we should get them to write a utopian scenario too.
Sadly I probably embody Oreskes and Conway's claim that scientists are far more comfortable being cautious and possibly understating risks than overstating them. Obviously I have tried to work against that instinct with this piece here!
The Black Score... very scary!
And thanks for the review of The Collapse of Western Civilization - I went and found a copy and read it. Terrifyingly graphic, and impressively researched.
A couple of observations - I reckon the authors put too much blame on scientists for failing to make people realise the facts. Were scientists at fault for ‘allowing’ Big Tobacco to delay significant govt action on smoking for decades?
The authors also make excuses for politicians as being ‘under the spell’ of false free market beliefs. Politicians by and large know exactly which side their bread is buttered on.
Interesting they posit that 300 years into the future we remain in vigorous discussion on whether, now, ‘decentralisation and redemocratisation’ may be considered. But no specific mention of the fate of capitalism. In the story it was the powerful centralised government of China that was able to take actions in the face of (an emergency). So maybe Trump is on the right track with his moves toward dictatorship! (No he’s not, I’m joking)
thanks Lachlan. I appreciate you standing up for us poor scientists. We're players, yes, but sometimes only bit players.
I was just listening to an interview with someone writing about the Middle East and they made the point that politicians and senior policy makers are generally very well informed and know exactly the 'facts', but almost all feel the personal risks of taking action are too great to overcome the uncertain gains. They went on to say that they changed tack in their writing, from trying to inform and persuade those specialists / elites, to trying to reach a broader audience, to create conditions where the the risks of action decline.
Benevolent dictatorships, eh?
Yep. Reaching a broader audience is key, or if not broader, then at least differently targeted. Mass media of course is controlled by vested interests, and ditto social media (hence allowing mis and disinformation so all of it is treated with scepticism)(or else blindly believed!).
In TCOWC when they mentioned the entire populations of Australia and Africa were wiped out, my first thought was Oh I'm sure Gina Hancock and all folks of that ilk had comfortable escape strategies in place in plenty of time.
Quite disturbing. However, what the authors said governments achieved by silencing scientists via legislation, we have achieved either through ignoring them or denial.
Another thoughtful read - thanks!
thanks Patrick. That's a great point, and I think partly motivation for Oreskes and Conway (and me) writing in the first place!
Hamish,
if these points are the Black Score highlights, I can't wait to read the full text ... I think the editors made a hugh mistake leaving this out. The video footage will be be spectacular !
Combining history with future is a good 'genre', a bit like alternative history. I wonder what an alternative history/future version of Black Score could be ? (Yes, I know, I should try to write one before the sea reaches my front gate ...)
Great work.
Mike
thanks Mike. us scientists are a slow lot, but it is gradually dawning on us that there may be merit in finding different ways of talking to people about what we do and just what the Dickens it might all mean
Whenever you are ready, we have a guest post slot waiting for you 😀
The Black Score. Nice term that.
I like how this genre allows you to amp up the catastrophe without it feeling quite as confronting. It's like, some of this is clearly wrong, but we'll just go with it because it's like a movie.
thanks David. It's certainly a distinctive genre, a little more up my alley than the burgeoning field of climate fiction. It would be interesting to get a similar version of this from other fire scientists around the world, find out where the areas of agreement and disagreement are (typical scientist, obsessed with quantifying uncertainty!). If we did this we should get them to write a utopian scenario too.
Sadly I probably embody Oreskes and Conway's claim that scientists are far more comfortable being cautious and possibly understating risks than overstating them. Obviously I have tried to work against that instinct with this piece here!