|
(from Wikimedia) |
"11) Why are we arguing the issue? Challenging vested interests as powerful as the oil and coal lobbies was never going to be easy. Scientists are not naturally aggressive defenders of arguments. In short, they are conservatives by training: never, ever risk overstating your ideas. The skeptics are far, far more determined and expert propagandists to boot. They are also well funded. That smoking caused cancer was obfuscated deliberately and effectively for 20 years at a cost of hundreds of thousands of extra deaths. We know that for certain now, yet those who caused this fatal delay have never been held accountable. The profits of the oil and coal industry make tobacco’s resources look like a rounding error. In some notable cases, the obfuscators of global warming actually use the same “experts” as the tobacco industry did! The obfuscators’ simple and direct motivation – making money in the near term, which anyone can relate to – combined with their resources and, as it turns out, propaganda talents, have meant that we are arguing the science long after it has been nailed down. I, for one, admire them for their P.R. skills, while wondering, as always: 'Have they no grandchildren?'"
Thank you, Mr. Grantham. There is little I can add to this.
----------------------------------------------
[This one of a series of daily posts I am drawing from Jeremy Grantham's Summer 2010 Investment letter. Mr. Grantham, a contrarian, is on the Board of Directors of GMO LLC, a global investment firm with over $100 billion under management. Mr. Grantham takes a large, worldview perspective on investments--with an eye toward long-term trends. He is right-on about the impact of global warming.]
No comments:
Post a Comment