Slashdot Mirror
Climate, Habitat Threaten Wild Coffee Species
An anonymous reader writes "BBC reports that Dr. Aaron Davis of the Royal Botanical Gardens claims 'almost three-quarters of the world's wild coffee species are threatened, as a result of habitat loss and climate change. "Conserving the genetic diversity within this genus has implications for the sustainability of our daily cup, particularly as coffee plantations are highly susceptible to climate change.'"
It is the same setup as the Iraq war:
- all the experts agree
- if you don't support it, you're a terrorist
- sudden alarmism because of unrelated events (9/11 for iraq, the al gore movie for this)
- exaggerated claims (mushroom clouds vs new york under water)
- scaremongering
- ignore evidence that shows that the conclusions were assumed
The "experts" who agreed on the Iraq war were politicians, who heavily filtered CIA reports, cherry picked data, strong-armed and lied to other politicians. That isn't even remotely similar to hundreds of scientists and thousands of published peer reviewed papers.
In terms of reacting strongly to people that deny AGW, it is because the vast majority of the 'deniers' argue with ideology, not science. That is because there is very little science for them to argue with. If someone kept trying to convince the world that all the "experts" who say the sky is blue are wrong, that it is actually red, would you waste your time on them?
In terms of the alarmism: that is mostly coming from...can you guess who....the politicians! Alarmism works to sell an issue and they know it. The "experts" aren't the alarmists. The vast majority of the scientists publish papers with dull sounding titles and make very little, if any, public comments on the ramifications of their findings.
Is there more research to be done? Sure.
Are the exact impacts of AGW well understood? Not really.
Is the climate warming and is man contributing? 100% certain.
Do we know exactly how much man's contribution is warming the planet? Not exactly.
But we know we are having an effect. And there are hundreds of other reasons to "go green". From national security and getting off foreign oil, to reducing pollution, creating new industries and new tech jobs, getting ahead of Europe and selling green tech to them instead of buying it, diversifying our power sources making our grid less susceptible to failure, etc, etc etc..
"Going green" can be done without destroying the economy, and it might actually be a great way to restore a lot of America's lost manufacturing base.
Any way, I got a bit off topic hehe. I just found you comparing Iraq to AGW to be way off on lots of levels.