Essentially science, invention and discovery has led to humans destroying the planet via over production of noxious gases, solids and liquids, over population, ability to mine for fossil fuels, and so on.
Not knowing much but I naively believe science is also the solution, for example could nanotechnology repair the ozone layer, could they dismantle harmful gases and liquids before they are released into the environment, couldn't all power be generated by solar, wind and wave energy, couldn't GM food be used in certain environments to benefit the starving (dangerous ground there i know) and so on again. If we only invested in the solutions now rather than keep trying to reverse our way out of a situation that is probably beyond repair (it pains me to say so but it appears Kyoto has had no affect globally). Not that we shouldn't stop the causes of environmental damage to prevent coming out of the current ice age too rapidly!
2006-11-09 05:04:58 · 2 answers · asked by WeirdNA 2 in Environment
Following the first reply I hoped those beliefs stated by Agius1590 were implicit in my question, I don't mean science itself, obviously I mean the manipulation/abuse of science by industrialists etc, the key question I am addressing is why aren't we investing more in radical science now to solve these issues.
2006-11-09 20:24:45 · update #1
You can't say science is the cause of these problems, science is an understanding of how the world works, its people that have ruined this world by not understanding the consequences of their actions, there is no true science involved in ignorance.
2006-11-09 05:15:21 · answer #1 · answered by agius1520 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Congrats to Agius 1520! No one could put it better!
2006-11-09 13:19:06 · answer #2 · answered by Christine H 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋