Summary of the speech

We all agree that global warming is taking place, but our reactions differ. In response to this knowledge, society is divided into three groups: sceptics, prophets of doom and scientists.

The sceptics say that there is no real risk for humanity and that there is no need to worry. According to this vision, the world is something solid and strong. They see the world as something that is stronger than us. Then there are prophets of doom. As they see it, the longer greenhouse gases stay in the atmosphere, the greater the damage will be. This is the most frequent type of attitude seen among the public. It is a conventional vision, influenced by the green movement. This vision sees the pain we are causing the earth. And then there is a third group of people, the radicals. They are not journalists or casual observers, they are scientists. According to this group the phenomenon of global warming is disturbing and happening fast. It will not follow a gradual path, an exponential growth, but will be sudden and have dramatic consequences.

Eric Fromm defined the XX century "the age of anxiety". It was dominated by conflict between two superpowers, with the very real possibility of nuclear war. The risk of climate change is only one of the risks produced by the endangering of nature, and science and technology will change all that.

The feature of our time is the prophecy of the end, no longer coming from prophets, no longer written by scientists. However three main points should be remembered: in the XXI century people are healthier, we live longer and there is great economic development in China, Brazil and elsewhere. It is a century where scientific progress has enriched society with new values. But this is not a reason to underestimate the risks from other sources.

One of the reasons for fear is that many misunderstand the nature of risk. In the public sector, there is a tendency to present the worst possible hypotheses as real risks. As a result the public is a lot more scared than it should be and counterproductive measures are taken, such as those taken after 11 September. Here is a paradox: the reaction to the attacks on the Twin Towers was to stop flying. The result was that people preferred to drive and there were more road accidents with many more victims. If they had flown they would have been saved. The perception of risk is not the same thing as the actual risk.

And then there is the question of politicians and media amplifying fear. Politicians amplify fear for their own self-interest. They support neither the prophets of doom, nor the optimists who undervalue risks, including those of climate change.

In recent years I have been busy observing climate change. I'm sure that there will be climate change. Not al fears are overdone and not all our anxieties are based on lack of reasoning. There is a break between what is happening today and an abstract future, and thus fears reflect only on our daily lives. Climate change is pushed into a corner, and never comes out in the open, and in the meantime people live their lives the way they always have. Instead we should turn climate change into an obsession.