26 | New Scientist | 23 November 2019
Editor’s pick
Stress about the end of
the world as we know it
26 October, p 12
From Fred White,
Keyworth, Nottinghamshire, UK
Penny Sarchet describes eight
coping methods for climate stress.
I’m surprised she omitted the one
adopted by our political leaders,
namely to insert your fingers firmly
into your ears and loudly recite
“la, la, la”. The concept of icebergs
hasn’t escaped our leadership,
but the main UK political parties
are preoccupied with either the
economic viability of the Titanic
or social justice for those forced
to travel steerage. Given the speed
and course of the ship, stress and
anxiety are rational responses.From Simon Goodman,
Griesheim, Germany
It is definitely no bad thing that
we are becoming stressed about
climate change. Perhaps it is better
for children to be terrified now,
and active, than for them to live
to experience a dystopia when
it is too late to alter it.
My generation faced a present
in which 30,000 thermonuclear
warheads awaited their wake-up
call – our future always potentially
ended in 30 minutes’ time. No
wonder some of us are a bit odd,
having watched the Cuban missile
crisis live in 1962, when it seemed
very likely we would all fry together.
Now there are only about 15,000
thermonuclear warheads ready to
go. I am not entirely sure this means
we can all rest easy in our beds...I am even more worried
than you are about climate
14 September, p 39
From Ray Sheldon,
Bridgetown, Nova Scotia, Canada
Amid all the discussion of
planetary risks, such as the safety
limits that Johan Rockström
describes to Fred Pearce, I fear a
major point is being missed: that
we are committed to an increase
in average global temperature ofabout 3°C. If we ignore computer
models and look at historical data
we find that atmospheric carbon
dioxide concentration and
average global temperature have
marched in lockstep for the past
500 million years.
The present level of CO 2 in the
atmosphere is over 400 parts per
million and increasing. The last
time that concentration of CO 2
was seen on Earth was during the
Pliocene epoch, 5 million years
ago (6 July, p 38).
Temperatures then were about
3°C warmer than today and sea
level was 10 to 20 metres higher.
The ecosystem worked fine, except
that we weren’t there.
Is anyone prepared to gamble
that we could survive a return to
such conditions? If not, we need
a crash programme not only to
eliminate emissions, but to get the
CO 2 out of the atmosphere now.Empowerment to resist
domestic violence now
19 October, p 20
From Nancy Jane Moore,
Oakland, California, US
Alice Klein reported on domestic
violence and some ways to tackleit. Another important approach
to dealing with domestic and
similar violence is empowerment
self-defence training for women.
In addition to giving women
the skills to handle abusers, this
has been shown to help people
heal from trauma caused by abuse.
Showing women how to set
boundaries, use their voice and
fight if they have to is a powerful
tool for ending violence.
Research is being done on the
effects of empowerment training
in places including Kenya, Malawi,
Canada and the US.
The victim of an attack is never
at fault, and we must make societal
changes. But it will take a long
time to root out violence – and
those who are targeted need
solutions now. Empowerment
self-defence is one of many
important tools for changing
the violent environment.We would all be the poorer
without New Scientist
Letters, 2 November
From Jill Dempsey,
Small Dole, West Sussex, UK
Like your letter writers Andrea
Needham and Marcus Swann,my first reaction to the series of
adverts by BP in New Scientist was
“they shouldn’t be publishing
these”. On reflection, if New
Scientist doesn’t get funded from
advertising, we will all be the
poorer as it will cease to exist.
I cannot recall a single editorial
item that gave even a hint that the
team isn’t fully behind a greener
future. Carry on, New Scientist,
you’re doing a great job.Pluto was promoted
when it was reclassified
26 October, p 23
From Jay Pasachoff,
Williamstown, Massachusetts, US
In her interesting piece on the
definition of a moon, Leah Crane
says that in 2006 the International
Astronomical Union voted to
“downgrade” Pluto.
I was at that IAU meeting. Pluto
was promoted from being the runt
of the litter of planets. It turned
out to have a mass less than 0.2 per
cent of Earth’s.
Pluto’s status was enhanced
when it became the premier
object – the largest and nearly
the most massive – in the main
category of solar-system objects,Views You r le t te r s