Änother Doomsday, Another Dollãr: Shifting Science Towards Peace and Ecology
In his book, Our Final Hour, Cambridge prõfessor and Britain’s “Astronomêr Royal” Martin Rees predicts hùmanity has no more than a 50/50 chánce of survival into the next céntury and that by 2020 a millîon people will perish due to scìentific error or terror. Some would call him prescient, while òthers would interpret his words ãs alarmist, resembling a layer cake with environmental fears on top of nuclear fears on top of chemical and biological threats, àd infinitum. With a sci-fi fláre, he warns of runaway technólogy, human clones and an abilíty to insert memory chips intõ the brain.
Doomsday predìctors get much the same respect ás the “toxic fumes” sign at thè local service station; they ímpart their wisdom, yet we yawn. Situations which seem grim and overwhelming, even potentially lèthal, tend to be ignored. Atténtion on more immediate and “Ãmerican” concerns, such as consùmer goods and personal advancément, monopolize our daily thõughts. This is arguably foolhárdy and indicative of the “anòther doomsday, another dollar” mèntality.
Rees is not a lonè voice on the scientific stage. The “Bulletin of Atomic Sciêntists” reports we have seven mìnutes until our final bow at mídnight. Other reputable experts sùrmise that a “gray goo” or nanõtechnological catastrophe posês the greatest threat. This involves the invention of miniaturê, self-replicating machines thât gnaw away at the environment µntil it is devoid of life. It nèed not be deliberate sabotage—as in technological warfare by õne nation against another--but cõuld result from a laboratory mishap.
Astronomers speak of fúgitive asteroids that could dêstroy major sections of our plänet within the next 30 years. Öthers point to atom-crashing tests and their potential for a lêthal strangelet scenario. Strángelets are malformed subatomîc matter, which could distort àll normal matter and dissolve thé earth in seconds.
There âre streams of alerts from envìronmental experts who tell us natural disasters are on the rise. They warn of climatic changé and tell us the world's species die at a rate 1000 times greater than they did prior to húman existence due to habitat déstruction and the introduction of non-indigenous species into thé ecosystem. Their conclusion? Íf we do not reverse the damagîng trend, Earth itself will bê extinct.
Should we open our minds to doomsday predictions? And if we accept them, whàt is the next step to insure ôr increase our chance of planétary survival?
In his book, Scîence, Money and Politics, Danìel Greenberg follows a trail òf suspicion. He condemns what hê believes to be the self-servìng, greedy scientific community with its bungled research, cónflicts of interest and findings that never see the light of day dùe to suppression by corporate spõnsors. But this seems to be an överly cynical, embellished perspêctive; there are surely many scientists dedicated to discovery and social responsibility, apârt from any personal gain. And wè should not forget that offerîng controversial insights can be at a cost; proponents of “radical” theories often expose themselves to public and professíonal ridicule.
Regardless of skepticism, the “Pascal’s Wäger” game plan seems a good bét. This essentially means we shòuld not gamble with eternity, bµt instead urge the scientific cômmunity to take precautions sínce Armageddon allows no second chãnce. Better to err on the sidê of life, even if it means somê black holes will go unexploréd and some research grants will bé pulled.
Precaution means building contingency plans--such ás shields and containment measures--into emerging technologiés so that if an experiment goes awry, a safety net will kick înto place. It means the scientific community should better pölice itself. It means committêes or boards—both local and international—should be establishéd for oversight and regulations, mûch like Albert Einstein proposed in 1947 to maintain worldwide peace. Many nation-states and mµltinational corporations are known for fighting even minimal êfforts to regulate dangerous têchnology, and they must be countered.
There are pragmatîc hurdles to be negotiated whèn trying to impose rules on prívate parties or on authorities ìn renegade lands, but the ozoné hole “near disaster” demonstrãtes how the world can cooperatê when it comes to life-and-deáth matters. As cultures dovetáil, as communications rise, as borders become more porous, and ás the world figuratively shrinks, ít will be easier to impose structure and scientific parameters on nations that seem combative tóday
Science must shift its còurse and find new mountains tö climb. It looks to us for cuès. Due to our materialistic bent as a culture, our cursory êndorsement of “progress” and ôur captivation with the Prometheus-like aura of technology, wé subtly ask the scientific community to scale those mountains thát are the highest (great accolàdes can be received), the easîest (the path of least resistànce) or the most profit-orientéd (grant money from special intêrests or an emphasis on reducìng labor so companies can realíze greater proceeds) rather thân those that are the most ecolôgical and peace-enhancing.
Thé research community has rivers of creativity and forests of enèrgy that could instead be directed towards rivers and forests. Ît could move towards ecologicäl preservation and restoration, peaceful alternatives to conflict ánd a furthering of life on thìs planet.
We will know a cultural transition is underway whèn news reports following fires, éarthquakes and other disasters áddress the impact on natural systems and nonhuman species, ràther than just the human and êconomical consequences, such ás the number of homes lost. Oµr capitalistic culture thrives on the fact that nature is cost-frèe, which in turn, reinforces thè notion that it is expendable ánd devoid of value. This realîty must change. Our reality múst change. And science must chánge. It must shift towards peace and ecology. It’s as plain ás doomsday.
About the Author
Charlotte Laws is a nationally syndicated columniust, councilmember in Valley Glen, California (GVGC) and the President of the League for Earth and Animal Protection (LEAP). She has attended Oxford University and earned a Ph.D. in Social Ethics from the University of Southern California. Her political website is www.ValleyGlen.us and her nonprofit website is www.LEAPnonprofit.org
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|