Scientists tell us the world is warming and that a climate catastrophe is imminent. They?re probably right. Yet climate change framed by scientists, politicians and economists as a straightforward pollution problem will neither convince sceptics nor advance the difficult decision-making process. Mark Maslin, a climatologist at University College London, recently offered his analysis of climate denial and the sceptics? reluctance to accept the science. In an article published here he correctly observed that ?the lack of acceptance of the science of climate change is neither due to a lack of knowledge, nor due to a misunderstanding of science?. Yet by framing climate change as ?a massive pollution issue that shows the markets have failed and it requires governments to act collectively to regulate industry and business? he continues the vicious circle. If climate science provides the main argument for governments to regulate private enterprise, sceptics will continue to deconstruct the supposedly legitimising science. Therein lies a problem not only with Maslin?s generally well-informed analysis, but also with the orthodox political approach to climate change. In the US and anglophone countries, any efforts to enforce emission regulations to solve the ?massive pollution issue? are regularly stunned by the sceptical critique of the ?underlying? scientific facts.

Click Here To Read More