Given the radical decrease in belief in the reality of global warming among the population of the United States and various Western nations in recent years, it may seem premature and a bit hysterical to cry wolf about the dangers of remedial measures that may never be implemented. Yet given that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that human activity is largely responsible for the 0.8 degrees Celsius increase in mean global temperature since the beginning of the Industrial Age and that further increases are surely coming our way, the matter is beyond urgent. Way beyond urgent.

Ninety-seven percent agreement means that if there are, say, 100,000 climate scientists in the world, only 3,000 of them dispute the data indicating that anthropogenic climate change is real. Take any group of 100,000 persons, whether bakers, candlestick makers or rocket scientists, and a few thousand are pretty much guaranteed to march to the beat of a different drummer. True, nonconformity can be an important social good, and consensus-challenging ideas of visionaries who have the basic science correct must be evaluated. Given independent laboratories and freedom from the taint of big money with an agenda—such as rightwing think tanks funneling cash to climate denial—this, in fact, is what science does, and it does it well.

Ninety-seven percent agreement means that of a group of thirty-three, thirty-two have reached consensus, with one holdout. In a group trained to think critically and make careful observations and rational judgments, this is impressive. Adrift at sea in a lifeboat with thirty-two navigators and oceanic geographers who agree unanimously on Plan A, versus one guy in the corner with wild eyes who argues for Plan B, who ya gonna believe? How about if it is clear that Plan A would mean a loss of significant amounts of money for the rich and big corporations in return for a clean environment, whereas Plan B would keep the bigwigs rolling in dough in return for an end to life as we know it on the planet?

Science has spoken loud and clear: Unless radical measures to deal with climate change are made soon, very very soon, the earth and its flora and fauna, including Homo sapiens, face a troublesome future and possible Extinction with a capital E. And Africa is likely to be Ground Zero.

The 0.8 degrees C increase has been accompanied recently by monster storms like Katrina and Sandy, flooding in the UK and severe drought in California. The (fading) hope of climate scientists is to be able to check the increase in temperatures at 2 degrees C. Given the observed severity of weather events accompanying a rise of 0.8 degrees, a bump of +2 degrees seems fairly horrifying. As Naomi Klein writes in her recent book ‘This Changes Everything’, it is likely to mean a “death sentence” for low-lying island states and large parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. And this is the best case scenario. As Klein notes, the World Bank—hardly a bunch of hippie radicals—has concluded we are on track for +4 degrees warming, which could raise sea levels by two meters by 2100 and several meters more beyond then; the International Energy Agency projects +6 degrees Celsius (10.8 degrees Fahrenheit). With each passing month, a nightmarish, post-Apocalyptic future of suffering, despair and death (and the lurking Big E) looms like the full moon through a telescope.

Clearly the profit motive of the big polluters—the “extractivist” economies like gas and oil, industrial mining and Big Agriculture, in particular—and their iron grip on politicians are the major obstacles to action, but lurking in the mainstream subconscious also is the hubris of belief in a last minute quick fix through geoengineering (anything to avoid having to wean ourselves from addiction to fossil fuels and the consumer-based Western lifestyle). If by some quirk anthropogenic climate change turns out to be real, this line of thinking goes, technology will save us in the end. When change becomes undeniable even to the deniers, we need only turn to our genius scientists—who until this time had been discounted as ranting fools—to come up with some futuristic but foolproof hi-tech plan to pump reflective particulates into the stratosphere to block sunlight or dump iron sulphate into the oceans or some other untested scheme having unforeseen consequences (such radical ideas as restoring habitat and preserving natural resources much too quaint to be considered, evil “socialism” to be fought to the bitter end, and by then it will be too late for that anyway).

As Klein points out, it’s difficult to predict with any reasonable degree of certainty all the effects these hi-tech quick fixes will wreak upon global weather patterns—and even more difficult if not impossible to control or channel them in uniformly beneficial ways. One such fix which on the surface seems relatively straightforward, Solar Radiation Management (SRM), involving the pumping of reflective particles into the stratosphere, may transform blue skies to a permanent gray pall everywhere. Other consequences, however, are unlikely to be so equally distributed.

Klein points to several computer-modeling studies indicating that SRM interventions could have disastrous effects on the African and Asian summer monsoons; one study examining a Northern Hemisphere point of origin for the spraying of reflective particles estimated a 60 – 100% decrease in plant productivity in the Sahel. Sixty to one hundred percent! Africa would fare better with a Southern Hemisphere point of origin, at the expense of increased hurricane frequency in the United States. But as Klein notes,

“Does anyone actually believe that geoengineering will be used to help Africa if that help could come only by putting North America at greater risk of extreme weather?”

It becomes clear why Naomi Klein subtitled her book “Capitalism vs. the Climate.” The extractivist plundering of earth’s resources in the name of corporate profits and rampant consumerism is at war with the planet. The book could equally be subtitled “Capitalism Massacres the Natural World” or “Capitalism Causes Suffering for Billions” or, more to the point of the present discussion, “Capitalism Continues its Centuries-Long Ravaging of Africa (and Asia) to the Very End.”

There isn’t much time left to avoid (possibly Ultimate) Catastrophe. Years, not decades. Western leaders—as illustrated by Obama’s championing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which tramples environmental rights to further the rampages of “free trade,” i.e., corporate greed—show no sign of being anything other than foes, not allies. Only a worldwide mass movement will turn the tide. Starting with you and me.

* David Cupples is the author of ‘Stir It Up: The CIA Targets Jamaica, Bob Marley and the Progressive Manley Government’, a novel. Connect with David at http://stiritupbob.wix.com/stiritupcia or http://www.facebook.com/StirItUpCIAJamaica

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

* BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Please do not take Pambazuka for granted! Become a Friend of Pambazuka and make a donation NOW to help keep Pambazuka FREE and INDEPENDENT!

* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.