Batman candidate argues for an ethical response to global warming

Philip Sutton - wants an
ethical response to
global warming.

Philip Sutton has long argued that our response to global warming should be ethical.

The Save the Planet candidate for the Batman electorate in the forthcoming July 2 election, Philip Sutton, says a safe climate policy would also be ethical.

“We have to start with what we care for or care about. A comprehensive ethic would care for all people and all species, world-wide,” he said.

Philip said the real test of this commitment would be to protect the most vulnerable people and species globally.

“Then we have to decide whether we really mean it - if we do, policies need to fully deliver on the protection we are aiming for. We have to set out to guarantee the achievement of our goals.

 “The earth has now heated up so much and there is so much CO2 in the air that the only policies that can be effective must involve:

• emergency speed action (like happened when the economy was mobilised in WW2)

• we have to get the whole economy to zero emissions (in 6 to 10 years)

• we have to put in place a truly massive program to take all the excess CO2 out of the air really fast - but we have to do this in a way that is compatible with maintaining food production and nature protection, so it will take a long time (probably over 100 years)

• we have to seriously consider that careful use of solar reflection methods to get fast cooling as soon as possible so that we can back the world out of tipping points and stop runaway climate change and sea level rise,” he said.

Philip said solar reflection methods should be not be used if they did not deliver net environmental benefit, such as the net protection for the world's vulnerable people and species.

“We have to recognise that climate change has now gone so far that if we decide to not use solar reflection (to add to an emergency speed transition to zero emissions and fast, massive CO2 drawdown) then people and species across the world will suffer massive losses - deaths, misery and extinctions, and civilisation could be threatened,” Philip said.

Philip Sutton to 'Save the Planet' in Batman

Philip Sutton is Save the Planet's Candidate for Batman.

The tireless climate change advocate and co-author of “Climate Code Red: The Case for Emergency Action”, will be the party’s candidate for the House of Representatives at the July 2 federal election.

The party announced today that it had secured the necessary 120 signatures and paid the $1000 to ensure Philip’s nomination.

Save the Planet said on its website that as far back of 2003, Philip was one of the first people in Australia (along with Adrian Whitehead and Matthew Wright) to recognise the need to reverse global warming and start campaigning publicly for it .

“Since then Philip has constantly lead the movement on global warming though a range of initiatives and research projects including the publication of key work Climate Code Red with co-author by David Sprat, and the Break-Through project,” it said.

National campaign manager for Save the Planet, Adrian Whitehead, said: “We have chosen to the opposite strategy for our front yard posters to that of Labor and the Greens by going content rich rather than just a slogan, name and logo.

“But if you are worried about a non-focus on slogans, let me assure you Philip will be "Standing Up for What Matters", "Putting People First", and creating "growth, jobs and a secure future" through an emergency speed build of a safe climate economy,” he said.

Controversial view fails scientific tests, but engenders controversy

Climate Code Red by David
Spratt and Philip Sutton.

The idea that climate change could end the human race is provocative, an extremity some endorse and for others a concept that defies scientific realities, extinguishes hope and not helpful in building any mitigation processes.

The article: “Dahr Jamail | Are Humans Going Extinct?” published on truthout refers to and quotes a professor emeritus of natural resources, and ecology and evolutionary biology, with the University of Arizona, who has been studying anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD) for nearly 30 years, Guy McPherson.

The Victorian Climate Action Network group has been alive with thoughts about McPherson’s views when Alastair Leith asked whether or not this “Pretty heavy reading” should be posted to Facebook?

“Will it just encourage the uninitiated to disengage even more on climate change?” he asked.

 

Trent Hawkins ponder similar questions.

Among those who responded was the fellow behind Safe Climate Science, Philip Sutton, who said: “I personally think it doesn't do any good at all to spread this sort of material.  For two reasons: first, because I think it's very unlikely to be correct; and two, because it is massively disempowering.

“I think that the chance that humans (as a species) will be driven extinct by climate change (no matter how bad the climate change is) is just about zero.  “Lots of humans could die (billions) but the rich/powerful/technically savvy will find ways to live in the Polar Regions and along the coastal fringes of the continents and perhaps on the oceans themselves - even in the worst case scenarios.

“But what this sort of material does also is that it chooses to put a zero probability of success on the actions of people who are trying to prevent climate change from causing fully blown catastrophe.  That is not a scientifically valid approach in my view.  It's more like a projection of personal depressive feelings. 

“And spreading one's personal depression to others is not likely to be helpful for effective action,” Philip said.

Fellow co-author of Climate Code Red, David Spratt, said, “This article has serious scientific mistakes, such as: average global temperatures could rise by 6 degrees Celsius by 2050, leading to devastating climate change; and at this level is simply not credible, so why waste time on it?”

David said there is plenty of credible, startling material around for this sort of conversation, such as that by Kevin Anderson, which would be a better focus for conversation.