Chances are that high-profile, climate-science denying GOPsters–and we have more than our share in Florida–will continue to give nothing more than lip service to scientists. Regardless of who actually meets with Eckerd College Marine Science Professor David Hastings and colleagues, it’s doubtful anything changes. It’s still not good conservative politics to act on scientific “uncertainty.”
Here’s an option. Instead of meeting with scientists, those who will just never get quarterly profit priorities and economic overhead of climate-change imperatives, why not meet with, well, an economist?
No, not the curvaceous Art Laffer, but how about Robert Frank, an economics professor at the Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University who puts “uncertainty” into bottom-line context.?
“‘Uncertainty’ cuts two ways,” reminds Frank. “Things might not be as bad as expected, but they could also be much worse. In other domains, uncertainty doesn’t counsel inaction. Few people, for example, recommend disbanding the military simply because adversaries might not invade.
“In any event, many scientists now believe that storms and droughts caused by climate change are already causing enormous damage, so all that remains uncertain is how much worse things will get. As (Yale economist-author) Robert Shiller has written … when the risk is as high as it now seems, economics tells us that insuring against worst-case calamities is prudent.”