Section:GDN 1J PaGe:5 Edition Date:190906 Edition:01 Zone: Sent at 5/9/2019 18:32 cYanmaGentaYellowblac
Friday 6 September 2019 The Guardian •
5
We scientists
must fi ght
for our world
peer-reviewed papers, and shared our fi ndings with
policymakers and the public. And, on the face of it, we
seem to have done a pretty good job: after all, we all know
about the environmental and climate crises, don’t we?
But while we’re now well informed, we haven’t
actually changed course. Biodiversity loss proceeds apace- a million species face extinction in the coming decades
- and we continue to pump carbon into the atmosphere at
ever faster rates. We have emitted more greenhouse gases
since 1990, in full awareness of its impacts, than we ever
did in ignorance. It seems that knowledge alone cannot
trigger the radical global changes we so urgently need.
It was this realisation that incited us both to embrace
activism , and to take to the streets and engage in non-
violent civil disobedience as members of Extinction
Rebellion. The refusal to obey certain laws has a long
and glorious history: from the suff ragettes to Rosa Parks
and Gandhi, many of the 20th century’s greatest heroes
engaged in non-violent disobedience to win their rights.
Today, civil disobedience is again on the rise. And
it is working. The protests that shut down four sites in
London in April raised the climate crisis rapidly up the
political agenda , and into the public consciousness.
The environment is now the third most pressing issue
for British voters, above the economy, crime and
immigration : the UK parliament and half the country’s
local councils have declared a climate emergency , and a
zero-carbon target has been enshrined into law.
Alongside this are the Greta Thunberg-inspired
school strikes and our sister movements worldwide.
This is what we have been waiting for. And yet, the
reaction within the scientifi c community has been
strangely muted. In conversation, our conservationist
colleagues (and we imagine climate scientists , too)
have long bemoaned the fact that environmental issues
remain so marginal in the public consciousness. “If only
conservation was mainstream,” we lament, “and if only
Claire Wordley
is a postdoctoral
research
associate at the
University of
CambridgeCharlie Gardner
is a lecturer in
conservation
biology at the
University of
Kentpeople would take action to fi ght for our world.” Well,
now they are, yet few of us seem to have joined them.
Young people have embraced the movement, and
grandparents , too. So have doctors and lawyers, farmers
and unemployed people. But not many scientists,
which is odd given we probably know more about the
severity of the problems we face than anybody. Perhaps
it’s related to an unspoken assumption that if our job is
to provide information, then adopting a position will
weaken our authority. In fact, research shows it doesn’t.
Alternatively, scientists may be reluctant to rise up
because there are “proper” channels for infl uencing
policy : you can vote, you can write letters and sign
petitions, and if things get really desperate you can walk
from A to B on a sanctioned march. The trouble is, these
avenues aren’t working, and lobbyists for fossil-fuel
industries have far greater access to political decision-
makers. In 2018, for example, oil and gas lobbyists alone
spent more than $125m (£100m) lobbying politicians in
just one country, the U S.
Worse, these lobbyists and the corporations they
work for have invested heavily in an anti-science
agenda, all with the aim of convincing the world that
we can carry on as normal. They are endangering our
very survival in pursuit of profi t, and undermining
the faith in truth, rationality and the scientifi c method
that – surely – will be critical to surviving these crises.
This is why we have taken a break from our usual areas
of research to publish an article in the prestigious
journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, urging our fellow
scientists to rise up and embrace rebellion.
As scientists we have spent years telling policymakers
that we must change course, but they haven’t taken
action. They may be starting to now, but only because
people have engaged in open rebellion, making it clear
that we will no longer accept inaction. Surely scientists
have a moral duty to join the masses, and rebel for life.A
s scientists, we tend to operate
under an unspoken assumption –
that our job is to provide the world
with factual information, and if
we do so our leaders will use it to
make wise decisions. But what
if that assumption is wrong? For
decades, conservation scientists
like us have been telling the world that species and
ecosystems are disappearing, and that their loss will
have devastating impacts on humanity. Meanwhile,
climate scientists have been warning that the
continued burning of fossil fuels and destruction of
natural carbon sinks, such as forests and peatlands,
will lead to catastrophic planetary heating.
We have collectively written tens of thousands ofClaire Wordley
and Charlie
Gardner
leyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
RELEASED BY "What's News" vk.com/wsnws TELEGRAM: t.me/whatsnws