Un étonnant effet collateral du changement climatique, par Jean-Louis Fellous, Jean-Charles Hourcades …
Résumez l’article en anglais (200 mots)
The current debate going on in societies on climate change gave rise to various attitudes, and notably to misinformation campaigns challenging, through irresponsible rhetorical exercises, experts’ works predicting a global climate modification. But what for?
First, the mixture between climatologists and environmentalists makes blurred the frontier between these actors, whose motivations and views obviously differ. The same does, when willing to decipher the technical climate science language in order to alert and awaken public opinion, scientists saw their discipline made a commonplace, everyone doing its own prognostic. Some even played down these climate changes.
Thus, the scientific community is discredited, as we ignore the numerous warnings, and we establish a self-satisfied view in which climate-skeptics focus on topics as important such as poverty, water access, or starvation. This attitude hides not only the self-evidence correlation between those manifestations but also demobilizes public opinion and rejects the idea, already developed widely, of an alternative growth.
Finally, this strategy only aims to indifference society and weaken the climate politics which struggle to initiate, in the name of immediate interests. It is therefore the citizens’ choice to decide on humanity future.
-189 words-
Donnez votre point de vue, en anglais, sur un aspect particulier de cet article (200 mots)
Several climate-skeptics, including Claude Allègre or Vincent Courtillot state that « climate change is not the most serious and urgent issue”. Such a statement is highly unjust since it just aims to distract public awareness from the real consequences brought about by the free market, spearheaded by Western countries, so as not to radically challenge the established order of society.
I think that playing on