Why Do Politicians Keep Giving Earth An Expiration Data?
The Times today is reporting some comments by Francesca Osowska, the bureaucrat who now runs the Scottish Natural Heritage. Ms. Osowska is alarmed, it seems:
“Imagine an apocalypse — polluted waters; drained and eroding peatlands; coastal towns and villages deserted in the wake of rising sea level and coastal erosion; massive areas of forestry afflicted by disease; a dearth of people in rural areas and no birdsong… All of this is possible, and there are parts of the world we can point to where inaction has given rise to one or more of these nightmare landscapes.”
This is all penciled in for 2030, so the apocalypse is now only 11 years away.
As attempts to generate a bit of a scare go this is right up there in terms of silliness, although it does mean that Ms. Osowska has narrowly outbid Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The New York congresswoman whose offer of 12 years was the subject of many a newspaper headline the other side of the pond a few weeks ago.
Indeed, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez became the subject of so much ridicule as a result of her absurd prediction that she has now disowned it, saying that she was “joking” and that you would have to be possessed of “the social intelligence of a sea sponge” to think she meant it literally.
SEE ALSO: AOC: Believing The Earth Will End in 12 Years Means You’re Dumb As A ‘Sea Sponge’
Where, then, does that leave Ms. Osowska’s prediction of 2030 for the world to come to an end? Does this mean that she has a level of social intelligence slightly below that of a sea sponge, or is she too “joking”?
In fact, we can tell that she doesn’t take the threat of global warming seriously at all.
A brief review of Osowska’s Twitter account reveals that she has enjoyed long-haul flights to Canada, Sri Lanka, South Africa, and Australia in the last few years, so it’s fair to say that she is not someone who really thinks we are facing an apocalypse.
In reality, her comments are an attempt to drum up interest in the lecture she is giving tonight at the Royal Society of Edinburgh. They are clickbait, pure and simple.
Nevertheless, I can’t understand why this sort of thing is necessary. I mean, who wouldn’t want to go out on a dreich Scottish evening to hear about how “special initiatives involving young people, gender equality and social inclusion” and “a fresh and innovative approach in galvanizing our care of nature” will save us from disaster?
Where do they get these ludicrous people from?
Read more at GWPF