Wagering on our environment

Using reasoning like Blaise Pascal’s famous ‘wager’ ( see: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/), let’s use that approach in dealing with our environment, and global warming.

Starting with the observation that warming is occuring, there are two possibilities:

A: Human activity(production of carbon dioxide) is having an impact, or

B: It is not.

We have two alternatives:

1: We can reduce our carbon dioxide output by reducing our use of fossil fuels.

2: We can maintain our current policy of using oil and coal.

Arranging into a table:

A                                                B

1: Use non-fossil fuels:   Win& Win – see A1 below                  Win – see B1 below

2: Use fossil fuels              Lose & lose Lose- see A2 below    Lose  – see B2 below

A1: Win & Win: Not only do we protect the future of our species, but we improve sustainablity and reduce dependence on other countries.

A2: Win:  We improve sustainablity and reduce dependence on other countries.

B1: Lose & Lose: We have an unsubstainable economy, dependent on other countries, and the future of our species is threatened.

B2: Lose: We have an unstainable economy, dependent on other countries.

With these results, our decision must be to reduce the use of carbon fuels.  In addition, applying Occam’s razor: (see


we don’t even need the supposition that global warm is occuring- it is still a benefit to convert to non-fossil fuels.  Q.E.D.