IF climate change really represents a threat to our civilisation comparable to the Nazis than it is time for us to stop backing off in half-hearted surrender and instead tell Mother Nature to shove it.

That's the spirit: Humans have thrived on dominating their environment

Recently in arguing against the “disaster track” of a Copenhagen UN compromise agreement on reducing emissions, NASA scientist James Hansen - in many ways the granddaddy of climate change theory - said global warming should be treated like an evil enemy.

“This is analogous to the issue of slavery faced by Abraham Lincoln or the issue of Nazism faced by Winston Churchill,” Hansen said. How did Winston Churchill and more broadly the Allied powers defeat the Nazis and their Axis partners?

One thing they did not do is cut industrial production and hand over their best weapons to make the Nazis more harmonious.

OK, they did initially try that strategy but Hitler kept leaving tank tracks over wider stretches of Europe.

Perhaps appeasement would have worked eventually, but its price would have been half a globe dominated by Axis slave states and almost unspeakable horrors.

If climate change presents as a credible menace to our way of life we would be silly to give up the great weapon of industrial civilisation - cheap power - in the hope that nature will take it easy on us.

To give ourselves the best fighting chance we shouldn’t contract our industrial base, we should expand it.

We need to be open to wider strategies than just reducing carbon, which because it is the by-product of cheap energy, no one really wants to do.

Forsaking the cheapest form of power is like poking ourselves economically in the eye with the expectation our ears will develop better hearing to compensate.

The Copenhagen conference is about trying to get countries to jump off a cliff together with a supposed parachute that might turn out to be little more than a few bits of string and a small table cloth.

So with no one willing to make the sacrifices being demanded, it would be better for us to be wealthier than poorer to deal with climate change to the extent it happens because richer countries are hurt less by natural disasters than poor ones.

If the most dire climate change predictions don’t eventuate, masochism will look like sheer folly especially when there are so many other desperate problems the world could be tackling.

It’s time to take a positive rather than a negative approach.

Sure our government should fund research into climate change “solutions” in the same way the Allied powers bought whatever the labs and factories could produce to defeat the Nazis.

However the best solution to climate change, going by history, almost certainly does not involve a “top down” bureaucratic central regulatory restructure of the economy through rationing and tax, with some picking of winners (preferential subsidies for renewables while ruling out no nuclear power).

The winning strategy or idea may not involve trying to stop or minimise climate change at all but figuring out the best way to live with or adapt to it, which is what people generally do brilliantly to changed circumstance.

The best idea is probably still waiting to drop into someone’s head when the situation becomes clear.

Politicians and bureaucrats who are telling us they have the answer and it is reducing carbon emissions most likely won’t like this change of tact.

They won’t be able to paint themselves as world savers and experts, valiantly struggling to rescue us from ourselves.

Those who see an ETS as a way to curry favour from government and earn money from buying and selling energy permits won’t like it either.

Greens won’t like this approach because it does not assume we should bow down to nature.

If humanity had always obeyed the dictates of nature humans we would still be huddled in comparatively small hunter/gatherer tribes on the plains of Africa.

We would die earlier.

Depending on food availability, life would either be relatively easy or we would starve.

We would live in constant fear of the elements and predators.

Entertainment would be mostly limited to wrestling and picking the nits out of each other’s fur.

Actually that sounds like the recreation options still favoured in some all male university dorms.

The old, sick or those vanquished in power struggles would be excluded from the tribe to die.

Life would be nasty brutish and short, in other words.

However once evolution gave us opposable thumbs and big forebrains it was game over.

From my work desk I can see windows that look out over Sydney’s west.

The brooding mountains are OK although I prefer the tamed patch of greenery visible from the windows opposite, Hyde Park.

Between the park and the great semi-arid expanse of wilderness is a city full of people living about the best lives any population en masse has lived.

More people have more freedom from basic survival needs to do whatever it is that they think will make them happy than in any era previously.

To climb down from the highest points of industrial civilisation just because the weather might get hotter seems almost like species treachery.

Perhaps Mother Nature now wants to give us some weather whacks for getting too uppity, but let’s not land the first blows on ourselves.

Besides which we can take her. If she wants a piece of us as the video gamers might says: “Come and get some b!tch!”

The best form of defence is offence, as sports coaches say.

So let’s not plot partial retreat to make Gaia happy but go unabashedly forward and realise the full panorama of human potential.

Most commented

29 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • neelo says:

      04:40am | 09/12/09

      Ha! I don’t agree, but the ballsiness of this argument is grand! Love it, well done.

    • paul says:

      06:41am | 09/12/09

      Get a grip David. Wars are passe and dont work:  war on drugs, war on alcohol (prohibition), war on terror etc. It’s time to think outside the box rather than recycling George Bush kneejerk patriotic posses and tough but empty rhetoric. And, if you think looking out over those swarms of Westie suburbs and McMansions (and their creeks cum toxic drains that kids can’t even swim in these days) is the peak of civilisation and a monument to the taming and concreting of nature, you are having a crisis of the imagination.

    • Toddzilla says:

      07:46am | 09/12/09

      Great article, David. Though it is tongue in cheek, I can’t help but feel that it makes more sense than anything else that has said on the issue. I for one didn’t rise to the top of the evolutionary scale just to have the benefits of that taken away from me by some hippie mouth breathers below me on the evolutionary track.

    • DWest says:

      07:52am | 09/12/09

      We have punched under our weight with the Taliban - and the even more destructive food and fuel duopolies. Where do you suppose we could get the courage and balls to battle to battle gaia dude?  Call me old fashioned but I expect journalists to journey me insightfully into issues and present big ideas, not rehash 20th century pet hatreds of greenies, new agers or gaia. Boring.

    • Peter says:

      07:57am | 09/12/09

      Brilliant, just brilliant!

      Get of the subbies desk and into the op ed pages!

    • Kevin Rennie says:

      08:22am | 09/12/09

      Your strategy is not a war it’s a surrender. It’s also an oxymoron: more is less. We should be able to set more records for the hottest decade. The latest from the World Meteorological Organization (http://tiny.cc/z5jsa) suggests the need for abstinence not an orgy.

    • Eric says:

      08:32am | 09/12/09

      Kevin, the Climategate scandal shows that much of the “data” can’t be trusted.

      We need to do the science again, out in the open. Then we can have reliable data, and the basis for a real discussion.

    • Michael says:

      08:35am | 09/12/09

      We are not being attacked by Nature. We are being besieged by human selfishness. Something the underlying thesis of your article demonstrates all too clearly.

    • Steve says:

      09:09am | 09/12/09

      What an incredibly selfish take on things from the perspective of the rich. In the medium term we in the west will be ‘relatively’ shielded from the effects of the climate change we are mostly responsible for inflicting on the world. So it doesn’t seem to matter to us that unimaginable suffering and death could be the result for those uncivilised, pre-industrial ‘people over there’. At least we’re on a good wicket, why should we sacrifice any of our birth right luxuries? And for all those consumed by ‘climategate’, I suggest taking a read of this… http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/12/07/the-real-climate-scandal/

    • Patrick says:

      09:43am | 09/12/09

      Brilliant idea. If we simply concrete over the bush, there will be no more bushfires and no more loss of human life from them.

    • Lotti says:

      10:02am | 09/12/09

      I will link this article in my upcoming blog “Stuff Bogans Like”.

    • JK says:

      10:09am | 09/12/09

      If you want to advance the debate on what is an appropriate response to climate change you need to abandon the Minchinesque talking point that there is a left-wing conspiracy to de-industrialise the world. We’re a smart country where the majority of us live a lifestyle of which the Sun King would be jealous. Let’s have an intelligent debate about what decisions we are going to make on our future. Calling people names because they hold a different point of view may have worked in the playground, but this ought to be a grownup conversation.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      10:32am | 09/12/09

      A little tongue in cheek but the analogy to a war is valid. In a live or die scenario all options are canvassed and thoroughly debated and analysed. Multiple strategies are devised not by the politicians but by the experts because we want to win not loose. The use of resources is limited so we must make the most of what we have. Hanging your hat on just one strategy is rolling the dice.

      As George Monbiot acknowledges it must be transparent and the behaviour thus far has been anything but. For mine, until there is a full on transparent war about the science instigated by all scientists then these articles will continue to just fill in the time because for every Meteorology PHD that says yes there is another Meteorology PHD that says no.

    • Macca says:

      10:31am | 09/12/09

      LOL, the lefties are still struggling to find their collective sense of humour

    • Darren says:

      10:40am | 09/12/09

      Get with the new world: The old world is busted. We’ve got some cool new toys, and bigger and more infectious narcissism but it aint time for us mad human apes to be crowing about ourselves. Consume less - evolve more.

    • H of SA says:

      10:42am | 09/12/09

      Ha Lotti, I Love it thing bogans like - WAR! - especially war against the environment, it would fit with the “killing things” theme on the blog

    • John A Neve says:

      11:36am | 09/12/09

      David’s “primary duties are to scout for free food”. Having read this article I can see why. Is he really suggesting mankind just keeps on keeping on?
      Does he think climate change is a non event?

      Sub something, but editor, I’m not sure.

    • Chase Stevens says:

      11:47am | 09/12/09

      Funny David but the problem with the war analogy is that war is fought between two (Presumably) rational leaders (and soldiers obviously), but the “War on Climate Change” or whatever cliche’ term that would be used isn’t fought between rational people, it’s fought between one rational collective and one overwhelmingly powerful irrational force.

      Rather than expanding our industrial base we should be developing ways to utilise what we have more efficiently, regardless of any temporary cost increases, then we should look at expanding this far more efficient industrial base.

      The Copenhagen Summit or whatever should be looking at ways to help the world, not just rich nations, adapt to the eventual climate change.

      We should stop looking at Climate Change as a stoppable force and start looking at ways to minimise it’s effects.

      Also David there wouldn’t happen to be a bit of a video gamer in you would there?

    • Tim McCabe says:

      12:17pm | 09/12/09

      My local Bunnings store sells rainforest timber from Indonesia that even their own staff say is bad. They have been selling it for as long as I can remember. I gave up my job working at Perth Zoo because they used rainforest timber to build their animal exibits. They built their exhibit ‘harmony farm’ out of old growth Australian forest timber and Batu from Borneo. We import rainforest timber, have never cared for the forests of other nations let alone our own! So I am a cynic. Protesting in Borneo in 1990 an elder of the Penan told me, “If we lose our forests (the tong tana) we must die!” And you know, it has taken us many years to wake up to what is going on, but Bunnings will continue to still sell rainforest timber from Indonesia and Borneo and will continue to argue it is sustainable! You can count on them for that. So, have your meeting in Copenhagen and jump and scream as much as you want, but really, who are you kidding? In the real world, it is business as usual.

    • Razor says:

      01:15pm | 09/12/09

      There is uncertainty about the science.

      There is uncertainty about the economic solutions.

      There is uncertainty about the political solutions.

      I fully support the notion that the adapt as required approach is most likely to be a better outcome than the potential outcomes from a combination scientists, enviromentalists, economists and politcians.

      If we had let that sort of grouping be invovled with the development of computers and the internet we would still be using typewriters and using string between cans to comunicate.

    • Chase Stevens says:

      01:28pm | 09/12/09

      Razor is right. While there is uncertainty about anything we should stand back and do nothing until after the event. Then when in retrospect we can see what we should’ve done we can then go do what we should’ve done. Simple.
      Bugger the available evidence, there is to much uncertainty to even consider doing anything.

    • Glen says:

      01:49pm | 09/12/09

      I agree “The Copenhagen conference is about trying to get countries to jump off a cliff together with a supposed parachute that might turn out to be little more than a few bits of string and a small table cloth”.  Don’t worry about Kevin747, he will be safe and sound in his cushy UN job while the rest of us pay outrageous and cripiling taxes that achieve absolutely nothing.

    • Case says:

      02:03pm | 09/12/09

      Well said. Nature, by it’s very nature will do whatever it feels like doing, whenever it feels like doing it. No pumped up preening little PM, nor dreadlocked nit-infested (in)“activist” is going to exert one jot of influence on MR Gaia…or whoever he is.

      The sheer arrogance of these “concerned” dunces is exceeded only by their stupidity.

      Nature will sort itself out whenever it bloody-well feels like it, so until then, hot or cold, deal with it you sooks!

    • Razor says:

      02:18pm | 09/12/09

      Chase Stevens - any relation to Chevy Chase?

      I dont’ advocate doing nothing.  i advocate getting on with life.  Humans have adapted and will adapt.

    • Chase Stevens says:

      04:42pm | 09/12/09

      Razor - Chevy Chase would like he ... or she or whatever is related to me.
      Plus isn’t ‘getting on with life’ the same as ‘doing nothing’? Just wasting more words imo.

    • Joel B1 says:

      06:04pm | 09/12/09

      For what it’s worth. I dislike the way the AGWers have now become the CCers (isn’t that a type of corn chip?).
      Not many people deny the climate is a state of flux. Even right whinger Christians like to tell about a bloody great big flood (remember Noah anyone?).
      One of the problems faced by society presently is the misappropriation of CC by the AGWers and also of the weather by the AGWers. In simple terms the AGWers stole the climate and stole the weather. By way of example, it’s OK for Wong to say bushfires etc are the result of AGW but if others mention the fact that it’s been bloody cold in some places then “that’s not climate that’s weather, idiot!”
      I like to think that the universe as represented by the Earth really doesn’t give a shit about humans or human activity. It’s only the AGWers who need to feel important, “It’s us, it’s our (well yours actually) fault”. Nonsense to match anything I’ve ever read or heard. More to follow…

    • Norm says:

      07:54pm | 09/12/09

      Australians are afraid of the brave new world KR represents he rushing off to meet the mad hatter sprinkling magic dust and spending money like it has no real value.
      I work 40 - 60 hrs a week and it has value to me every new tax undermines the quality of life we have become acustomed to evry new tax keeps me away from my family and I dont think the Pm has the right to sign any treaty that will tax the Australian people to the tune of 400 billion dollars without a referendum or even permission from the senate.

    • Jeremy C Browne says:

      07:24am | 10/12/09

      Why won’t Penny Wong admit that global warming has stopped?  Abbott asserted that yesterday but Wong had no opinion on that statement. 
      Is he right or wrong Penny?

    • James says:

      10:29am | 11/12/09

      Jeremy C Browne says:08:24am | 10/12/09

      Why won’t Penny Wong admit that global warming has stopped?  Abbott asserted that yesterday but Wong had no opinion on that statement. 
      Is he right or wrong Penny?


      Because it hasn’t you nonce, look at the latest data

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

@TheStalwart an analyst in Sydney said it was a "sad day" http://t.co/vh4Yu4OgDD. I think he was just exhausted and gave up analyzing

ToryShepherd

@CatherineDeveny @sydwritersfest A wobble

Paul Colgan

RT @NASA: Amazing views from the International Space Station of Pavlof Volcano erupting in Alaska. http://t.co/vqBkkiOful

Paul Colgan

US Google Doodle features a girl's touching depiction of her father's return from Iraq http://t.co/4LiRFOntTY

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter