For at least 40 years experts have warned that if we don’t urgently change our ways the Earth will be irreparably ruined. Other experts have replied that global temperature and sea levels have been fluctuating for millions of years and that we can depend on human ingenuity and continued economic progress to save us.
The Economist recently described this nicely: ‘Some environmentalists … are so convinced of the righteousness of their cause that they will cry “wolf” at any event that might plausibly be thought to support their view of the world.’ This, The Economist continued, makes it hard for responsible scientists to know when they should begin shouting.
It’s a lot harder for non-scientists. A couple of centuries ago most reasonably educated people could understand science. The whiskery members of the Royal Society to whom Charles Darwin presented his ideas knew more about the classics than biology, but they were perfectly able to understand the theory of evolution.
However, over the next hundred or so years, science grew more complicated, and by the time Einstein was making his big announcements, the classicists had been left far behind. While I was writing this review I asked several people, all well educated (though not in science) and intellectually curious, to explain the theory of relativity, quantum mechanics and quarks. Few could do so. People like me don’t understand scientists’ language. How can we hope to understand their theories?
Indeed, it seems to me that our opinions are probably informed mainly by our political and ethical predispositions.
Ronald Wright’s A Short History of Progress is yet another warning. In just 122 pages (plus extensive notes) it covers much the same ground that others (notably Jared Diamond) have explored. But it does so in such an engaging and uncomplicated way that the lay reader has little difficulty keeping up.
Wright’s message is simple enough. Time and again civilisations have accomplished their decline and destruction by squandering their natural resources. Sometimes they acted thoughtlessly, but in some instances it is hard not to conclude that the folly was wilful.
Easter Island is a desolate landscape, but once it was fertile and well-wooded. It supported a large population (10,000 people in just 166 square km) with a rich social structure. At some point the islanders developed an obsession with Malcolm Fraser statues. Disaster followed. Trees were chopped down to make rollers to transport the statues and rats ate the seeds and saplings.