So I saw this in the Washington Times. It seems legit. Five hundred scientists told the UN to back off and stop rushing toward policies that might not help but will probably hurt people, especially the least of these.
Which is sort of what I've been saying for some time. I don't doubt that our approach to STEM, while doing many good things, has also produced harmful side effects for not only people, but the environment in general. And since my parents, especially my Dad, were old time conservationists before it was hip, I'm all for being more environmentally friendly. In fact, I think one of the ill effects of STEM has been to pull people from lives lived naturally within the natural world. Instead of using STEM to find ways to hedge off the dangers of nature, we used it to crush nature and pull ourselves out of it. I personally think that, in ages to come, that approach will be modified.
Nonetheless, I think the current debate is 95% politics and ideologies, and 4% science. The rest being the usual stupid in any debate. Clearly the debate is now the vogue thing for the jet set and celebrity culture, with millionaires and billionaires flying around the world and screaming for policies that will likely hurt a great many people who aren't millionaires and billionaires. That seems to be what the report to the UN is saying.
Putting aside the silly notion that all scientists advocating the hysterics are pure of heart and any scientists suggesting caution are wicked thralls of the fossil fuel conspiracy, it's enough that 500 scientists have issued a caution to the UN.