**Please consider supporting this blog and its information. Like Wikipedia, the pressure to turn information into revenue is ever present for a writer with limited resources. Your support of this blog would be greatly appreciated in any amount.
Recently, I was tagged in a post by a fellow FCS (Family and Consumer Science) teacher (see picture). I remember the common struggle of my students to understand the difference between knowledge, wisdom and philosophy or opinion. As you might imagine from the photographic post, when the three were used interchangeably, it led to all sorts of interesting outcomes in the kitchen.
As climate change becomes the focus of the news cycle for the next two weeks, there is no doubt that experts and World leaders will come armed with huge volumes of data to support their positions. In this global difference of opinion about who, what, when, how and why climate change happened, will leaders use knowledge, wisdom or philosophy to make their decisions and if they choose poorly, what further difficulties might the World see in the near future?
Personally, I am tired of being chastised by billionaire celebrities, child advocates without a high school education and extremist politicians with an economic agenda. I was thankful for the comments of the UK's Prince William highlighting America's split priorities (We need some of the world’s greatest brains and minds fixed on trying to repair this planet, not trying to find the next place to go and live.) In like fashion, Queen Elizabeth II has expressed similar frustration about how people talk about climate change but do nothing. With all due respect to these Royals, as leaders converge on Glasgow, Scotland for the United Nations Conference on Climate Change (Cop26), the World must also acknowledge that scientific minds must not be shackled by a political philosophy that often runs counter to actual science.
What is Known About Climate Change?
The sad but all too human reality is that today's scientific knowledge is largely based on mathematical speculation rather than actual physical conditions. Talking points focus on extremes which do not fairly represent real world conditions. Is a day the hottest because the temperaure peaks for a few minutes then drops rapidly to a much cooler temperature or is the hottest day one that has the highest per minute average temperature for 24 hours. The quick and easy "high temp" version misrepresents environmental conditions and should not be labeled "scientific knowledge". Real knowledge is consistent and predictable without excuses or questions. It is easily seen and can be replicated by anyone time and time again. The tomato is scientifically classified as a fruit only because it meets the same physcial criteria as an apple or grape. How it is used is not a factor--only the sum of its visible and verifiable characteristics count.
Even though this planet has survived thousands of years using fossil fuels and without global intervention, mankind continues to blame the environment for "changing". Modern society looks for an easy and quick explanation that absolves it of wrongdoing. In greenhouse gas theory, it found a principle so obscure that even fellow scientists would not understand it, industrialized countries found the "facts" they needed to create a philosophy that was both plausible and impossible at the same time. Rather than look for wisdom in the hundreds of reputable and detailed scientific studies and historical events that speak to the climate change phenomenon, society chose to adopt philosophy as knowledge while squandering any chance to gain wisdom.
Is Climate Change Wisdom Possible?
Achieving wisdom is not just about learning from mistakes but being mature enough to think critically about information. Real science follows its own rules. It cannot be made into what people want and does not occur without cause. Blaming fossil fuels, commercial farming, large families, or immoral living serves no purpose except to divert study from what could be a simple answer. At the same time, dismissing that which is uncomfortable to admit only keeps this planet in a state of upheavel.
Until leaders put economics and reputations aside for the good of the planet, this cycle of disinformation and arbitrary regulations will only serve to compound climate change. Wisdom requires an understanding that being right and doing right are two fundamentally different action. Needing to BE right comes from a place of immature thought while doing what is RIGHT comes from a place of knowledge and wisdom.
Is Solving Climate Change Possible?
It is certainly possible to solve climate change but only with a shift away from philosophy and toward knowledge and wisdom To put it simply, environmentalists need see nature as a tomato and not as an ingredient in a Bloody Mary. These well-meaning individuals have encouraged leaders to take drastic and unproven steps to 'clean up' the environment when the environment was working efficiently on its own. Clean air and clean water might be beautiful to look at but they rob wildlife of essential minerals which are otherwise unavailable in the real world.
Sadly, environmentalists tend to come from wealthy countries. They do not experience the consequences of their beliefs because healthcare and agriculture have monetized environmental dysfunction. The very fossil fuels which are declared harmful to the environment are turned into fertilizers that produce health foods and medicines which keep populations healthy. Poorer countries must suffer without such improvements and wildlife is left to die out because those who want to protect it do not understand basic chemistry well enough to realize they have caused this heartbreaking situation.
Its time for environmentalist to see nature for what it is, an imperfect tomato that does not taste good in a fruit salad and stop trying to make it into a Bloody Mary that only people can enjoy.