What I really want to emphasise is how this project (s) is introduced and described. There are messages that do not make logical sense and a narrative that is constantly perpetuated about “climate change”. There are a few terminologies that are interchangeably used, yet need to be clear about their meaning. Climate change, is the seasons and weather patterns. Weather is temperature, rain, wind. Global warming, is referred to as a result from the Greehouse Effect.
So overall, the on-going mainstream narrative is “human activity of CO2 emissions causes increased heating from the greenhouse effect”. This is the major negative phenomenon narrative. That by the global warming is increasing by 2C, or 3C, that the climate will change, in other words, weather patters will change. (Really, humans are God like, that Co2 emissions cause weather patterns to change?)
For readers who need to refresh their understanding about how the Greenhouse Effect works than here is the information>
Back to the point of my post, how certain sentences are worded, and which perpetuate the narrative about climate change, in sentences such as
"We need to reallocate our best resources to climate-proofing humanity.’
Logically, this is not possible, without climate there is no humanity, so what is this nonsense message?
To then “addressing climate change through innovation by achieving deep decarbonization across cities”.
Keep in mind that CO2 is also a natural gas, and without it we cannot live, because we are dependent on plants photosynthesis of C02.
Further to address this paragraph,
“all past prosperity has been built on the destruction of nature, too many people are unable to see a future for themselves in a post-carbon world, and stall the necessary change. We need to respond by controlling the narrative. But, a winning narrative requires solid cultural underpinning. That is why we are engineering a collaboration between science fiction authots and economists to imagine completely different economic systems”.
Do not wrap the wool over people’s eyes here, the hole has been dug deep enough. So, to address this paragraph, the aim is to live in a non-carbon world (?), which is impossible. Or to stall carbon output (?), which is also nonsense as carbon is always being produced and required for human, animal and plant life. So, yes, people cannot see a future in a post-carbon world because it’s absolute nonsense.
Further, to design new economic systems with the collaboration of science fiction authors and economists. There are already a lot of alternative economic based system that have been trialed, and are in use in small communities around the world. If the aim of the project/s is to actually invent an economic system with the collaboration of science fiction authors and economists and put this into physical, practical actions than it’ll be quite something. How about involving children, as their imaginations are ripe and fruitful? Main point is, their minds are not brainwashed with CO2 global warming narratives, so they can actually brainstorm ideas about new economic systems.
I am all for innovation, as it is crucial for humanity to seek innovative theories and put them into action, yet it doesn’t need to be equated with “controlling CO2 emissions”. The narrative can simply be to engage independent/like-minded group thought for humanity to positively increase quality of life. The Earth has a way of dealing with access gases, thus it’s very important to portray a narrative which communicates green-innovation, clearly and well.
So, how about to promote innovation in green-energy engineering, innovation in green infrastructure/architecture? Which has been done and is being done. To promote independent thought outside the box to mainstream narratives. As with a lot of mainstream narratives, not only in earth sciences, trends are sensationalised, which requires research funding - and guess what “global warming” requires research funding. Hence, IPCC and it’s whole existence. The narrative is over-sensationalised and dramatised to some dooms-day scenario. Plus, confusion with what and how weather, climate, and sphere/s processes work on Earth. How the sun, and oceans play a massive role in maintaining stable temperatures on Earth.
So, to truly utilise ones energy in projects and create tangible change for quality of life on Earth, I suggest expanding it in an area where one’s actions will be utilised for a worth while and well-intended cause. Where one understands the basis of the project. Climate cannot be precisely predicted, it’s a fact, scientific results will always be uncertain in relation to climate, because climate/ weather is an uncertain phenomenon. There can only be estimates, which are not certain. Further, I can see that the responses to my post/s will only be bias and I can already see that the intention is to control the “global warming” mainstream narrative. For those that are interested I found two interesting academic articles to challenge the global warming mainstream narrative.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/99EO00132