Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Mother-earthism infects climate change debate

By Bob Carter - posted Thursday, 6 October 2005

Many Australians are worried, rightly, by the possibility that avian flu might infect the nation. They should be just as concerned about the disease of “mother earthism”.

“Mother earthism” has already penetrated our shores, and is now reaching epidemic status. One of its most virulent strains is called “Hansenism”, after James Hansen, the high-profile NASA scientist who started the global warming scare campaign running back in 1988.

These diseases attack people who venture public opinions on matters of environmental concern. Transmitted through green agents provocateurs, the infection has reached nearly all Australian media commentators and newsrooms. However, its most worrisome recent manifestation is in two alarmist books on climate change by popular science writers Ian Lowe (Living in the Hothouse) and Tim Flannery (The Weather Makers).


“Mother earthism” has complex symptoms. Foremost is a touching belief in the Garden of Eden (further mystified by some as Gaia), the halcyon state of the Earth before the wicked industrial revolution. This balmy, and barmy, garden existed in a state of existential ecological balance, within an unchanging, benign environment.

The roots of its philosophical trees lie with Rousseau, and those who tend these trees deny absolutely the dynamic, ever-changing character of our planet, its biota, and its climate, as elucidated by many brilliant scientific studies over the past 200 years.

Secondary symptoms of “mother earthism” are many. They include: appealing to authority rather than explaining or discussing the science; false claims of consensus among scientists; cherry picking research and opinions which support a desired world view; and guilt-by-association smearing and vilification of those who hold alternative views.

Other symptoms include: erecting conspiracy theories about improper industry influence; endless repetition of incorrect or correct facts out of context; withholding data and computer code from other scientists; and a preference for computer model predictions over real world measurements.

Recourse to the intellectually vapid precautionary principle can also be added to the list, along with exploiting guilt among ordinary citizens and, above all, an unwavering alarmism that the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and it's all our fault.

The biggest serpent in the Gaia garden is alleged to be carbon dioxide, and we must give up our fix. Why? Because it's causing global warming, silly. And so it is.


The Earth's comfortable (for us) average temperature of about 15C is maintained by the atmosphere, without which the average would fall to a chilly -18C. The presence of small amounts of water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide - the "greenhouse gases" which absorb Earth's outgoing heat radiation and re-emit some of it downwards - causes the warming.

Most of the total warming of 33C is caused by water vapour (more than 30C), carbon dioxide contributing only about 1.2C worth. And of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the US Department of Energy estimated in 2000 that just 3 per cent comes from human sources, which equates to a warming effect of about four-hundredths of a degree.

Against such a background, and should all signatory nations to the Kyoto accord meet their commitments (which is vanishingly unlikely), computer models suggest that a further human-caused increase in temperature of perhaps two-tenths of a degree might be averted by 2100.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

Article edited by Allan Sharp.
If you'd like to be a volunteer editor too, click here.

First published in the Sydney Morning Herald on September 29, 2005.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

57 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Professor Bob Carter is a researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University. Copies of scientific papers and other media articles by Bob Carter can be accessed through his website.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Bob Carter

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Bob Carter
Article Tools
Comment 57 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy