More and more, arguments against the scientific consensus that humans are changing the Earth’s climate are not about science at all. Instead, they focus on loss of personal liberties and distrust of increased government regulation.
The concept of landowner rights goes back many centuries. For the most part, there is only modest regulation, such as zoning, restricting the rights of landowners. The regulation of waters has a more recent history, though even the Bible suggests that one should not pollute the waters that run from one property to another, as in Ezekiel 34:19, “Must my flock feed on what you have trampled and drink what you have muddied with your feet?”
The atmosphere has been the dumping ground for various pollutants, such as wood smoke, since the beginning of human civilization. Of course, we know why this must change: the atmosphere is not infinite and dilution is not the solution. While no one owns the atmosphere, its degradation is having an enormous impact on the lands and waters that support humanity.
Many arguments against climate change are about how regulating carbon dioxide emissions would result in a loss of individual and corporate liberties. Science asks that we pay the costs of pollution today, so that we leave a better environment for all people tomorrow. It is the role of government to balance individual rights with the well-being of the seven billion people who occupy this planet.
With the banning of smoking in public buildings, we’ve already regulated personal liberties with respect to air chemistry. Second-hand carbon dioxide is also harmful. We need to do better.
**********
–This segment was adapted from an essay by Dr. William H. Schlesinger. You can read the original piece on his blog Citizen Scientist here.
.
Web Links
Photo, posted July 6, 2011, courtesy of BK via Flickr.
.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio, with script contribution from the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies.