They say those who don’t learn from history are condemned to repeat it. Read this article in the Vancouver Sun, May 1982, and tell compare to the sorts of news stories we are seeing today about the same topic with the same overhyped warnings:
Hauntingthelibrary writes:
The trouble with the alarmists is that they don’t seem to realize that people are capable of looking back over what they said before, and judging them by their past record.
Perfect example: In 1982 Mustafa Tolba of the United Nations Environment Program excoriated the world’s governments for failing to institute “ecologically sound management” and warned them, in an “official forecast” that if they didn’t mend their ways,
by the turn of the century, an ecological catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust
Vancouver Sun, May 1982. Ecological Disaster Feared.
Mustafa tolba went on to become Executive Director for UNEP.
@Mac
What’s the difference between a Masai native wondering how to deal with a drought today, versus a Masai ancestor dealing with a drought 10,000 years ago?
What direction should they go? Should they give up their lifestyle and modernise, or should they keep their traditional means and lifestyle?
What do you think?
Mac, you are quoting from a document produced by a United Nations group (FAO). That is in itself suspect, since the United Nations has been allowing (possibly even encouraging) political elements in Africa to cause havoc with the environment and populations, and therefore the ability to produce food and material.
Imminent doomsday due to human folly is twenty years in the future . . .
and always will be
Google Maurice Strong and you will find the father of the economic transfer via the UN.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Strong
http://www.afn.org/~govern/strong.html
Although this is a blog, the information is very well researched (better than many journalists 🙂 )
http://roach1958.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/maurice-strong-and-the-collapse-of-industrialized-civilizations-thanks-tpgow/
Dwayne
No, I dont think they’re a joke. But I did laugh very hard at your mistake of reading the words “global”, “world”, and “nuclear holocaust” in the article and somehow mistaking the point in the article for being Africa and not the entire world…
Oh wait, maybe you didn’t read it, sorry.
“Hello everyone. I’m a scientist. That is a person who has the actual crystal ball, i.e. can predict the future with impeccable accuracy. Now, I’m selling this book here which is called: How to avoid abrupt environmental disaster which is coming very soon! I also happen to sell the solution to this very same problem. The solution is for you to give me much money and power for me and my friends to become ever more accurate in our understanding of the specific mechanisms and events concerning armageddon.”
Don’t you just love the credibility of the salesman who goes: “you desperately need this thing… which I happen to sell.”
Owen says:
Things never change. I was doing some historical research in the microfilm of the local paper and found alternating about every 30 years from the early 1800′s to present claims that first we are entering an ice age followed 30 or so years later with claims we were entering a hot desert climate full of droughts. Sometime I am going to have to collect all these into a lengthy article just for illustrative purposes.
PLEASE do this! And put me down for 2 copies!
From that part of my life as a historian, I’m not sure the present is much different than the past. Fantasticists/exaggerators have always been active for their own profi and control. Exposure, as Anthony provides with gusto, is good for the truth and the soul; they are never-ending efforts if we want to preserve a representative democracy.
So what do we do today? In good Teaparty fashion we defund them. We (the U.S., the “developed world”) don’t have much money anyway, or not much that’s worth very much, so the problem might not be as difficult as it seems.
GBees (3:27 a.m.) says it straight: “Time to ditch the UN, IMF, WHO, EU and all other international NWO wannabees. We don’t need World government nor their rantings. Time to restore our individual country sovereignty” and to respect that of others (end the massive amounts of aid that props up dictators).
“It’s the 21st Century, and we can fact check your azz.”
And I’ll be darned if I can remeber who to give the attribution to.
richard verney says:
January 19, 2011 at 3:29 am
I recall some poster having previously suggested that someone should collate a record of predictions and summarise to what extent those predictions were correct.
That would be extremely useful since it would demonstrate that the end of the world was never nigh and by inference is still not nigh today, whatever some doom sayer may be suggesting. It would help demonstrate to the public that despite what is being said, we have time on our side. We have time to get a proper handle on the data (may be starting from scratch a new reconstruction of past global records) and there is no need for knee jerk reaction, and there is time for a considered approach to addressing any problem that may truly exist.
———————————
I like that idea, I’ll start you off.
Prediction:
Tobacco companies say smoking doesn’t cause cancer.
Summary:
Tobacco use leads most commonly to diseases affecting the heart and lungs, with smoking being a major risk factor for heart attacks, strokes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, and cancer (particularly lung cancer, cancers of the larynx and mouth, and pancreatic cancer).
Prediction:
ExxonMobil says global warming is not caused by the burning of fossil fuels.
Summary:
That humans are causing global warming is the position of the Academies of Science from 19 countries plus many scientific organizations that study climate science. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.
Jamie says:
“I don’t understand the article from ’82. What exactly is the problem that will lead to this apocalypse?”
This is meant to be an all-inclusive warning. The problem they are warning about is “Too Little Government”. More government control will solve whatever environmental problem that might arise.
Tom Vonk:
Some deluded guy wrote
MOD – could you explain a little further how to blockquote? Thanks
REPLY: see the purple button Ric Werme’s guide to WUWT
and if this trend continues………………
The advert. next to the article was more interesting. “Canucks ’82 Stanley Cup souvenirs” I’m not sure what’s more likely, a Canucks Stanley Cup win, or “an ecological catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust”. Mmmmmm………….I think I’ll go with the Canucks. Just.
Another “gate” scandal: the UN dele-gate…
Africa needs wealth, not trickle down UN grants and light weight solar panels. They, like India and China can help power the worlds economy and live better lives. Environmental disaster is code for” give me money”. I think Africans need democracy and if they make wrong choices they will clean it up.
It is important to distinguish between the need to maintain a healthy environment, such as wild life habitats, diverse forestry, fish stocks etc. and climate change or global warming. The former, which this article is in part discussing, is a very real concern that should be dealt with. And can be with a bit of common sense, without hysteria, economic deconstruction, or the intrusion of authorities into every aspect of ones life.
Mac:
Don’t know if you’ve ever looked closely at Zimbabwe. If you want study how political corruption can cause a bread basket to go to environmental waste case, it is a good and recent example.
I don’t think the problems you described are not problems (more than likely exaggerated as they do come from a political organization with strong socialist tendencies), but it is the hyperbole in the original article which I believe most people have a problem with.
“by the turn of the century, an ecological catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust”
So, nuclear holocaust is no big deal then. Why were we so worried about nuclear war, when, apparently, a nuclear holocaust is like this?
SteveE says:
“That humans are causing global warming is the position of the Academies of Science from 19 countries plus many scientific organizations that study climate science. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.”
SteveE, I would say you skillfully captured the fundamental argument for AGW in a nutshell. Gavin and the regulars at RealClimate would be pleased.
However, most of us who hang out at WUWT already know the argument very well.
It would be helpful if you bear in mind:
– Consensus (while noteworthy) is not the same as scientific proof. “It’s true because we say it’s true”, just doesn’t fly anymore.
– Climate model output (while interesting) is not actual data. How many of the above “climate papers” are based on model output rather than actual observed data?
– The institutions and individuals you invoke are losing public trust because, for the most part, they are not honest about uncertainty. That’s the unfortunate downside of mixing science and advocacy.
richard verney says:
January 19, 2011 at 3:29 am
I recall some poster having previously suggested that someone should collate a record of predictions and summarise to what extent those predictions were correct.
See: http://numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
We go through this scare-stuff all the time in Public Health. Does anyone remember all the dire warnings about the H5N1 “bird flu?” Like, what happened with THAT scare? Funding for H5N1 pandemic preparedness is dropping like a rock!
These nightmare-campaigns are all funding mechanisms. Public scientists get the lay public all whipped up via complicit media, which gives the politicians cover to push these agendas & silo-building. Apparently nobody was read “The Boy Who Cries Wolf” when they were young.
The list of panic-situations is lengthy….nuclear winter, population bomb, missile gap, new ice age, bioterrorism, etc. Some resonate more than others, and CAGW fits that bill.
I highly recommend Dr. Linzden’s excellent essay on the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) topic:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/17/richard-lindzen-a-case-against-precipitous-climate-action/
Mac says:
January 19, 2011 at 5:16 am
Are these comments a joke? Eastern Africa (and the continent as a whole) has been devastated by environmental degradation….
Did the world end and I missed it? Was there a world-wide nuclear war and nobody noticed? Africa’s problems are fundamentally local and political. Unless a consortium of 1st world nations take over that region and sets up effective governments, there’s nothing effective to be done. Surely you’re not advocating a return to colonialism?
The world didn’t end, nor did it come close. You and Roger Samson maintain that the prediction was part-right. It was flat wrong. There’s a world of difference between an oil-covered pelican, deforestation in Africa, and world-wide nuclear apocalypse.
Mac says after a long rant January 19, 2011 at 5:16 am:
“Sounds pretty bad to me….although I’m sure it’s fine if you’re an armchair pundit.”
Yes Mac but do you really think all that is caused by an atmospheric increase of CO2 from 0.029% to 0.039%?
Draw your armchair up closer to the fire and tell us. – Judging from later comments, there is by now quite a crowd of us here waiting to learn how the magical CO2 has already managed to ravage Africa. -I assume Africa is only for starters! – Scary stuff Mac!