Although many environmental problems are only too real there are also many purported ones that are exaggerated, dubious or do not even actually exist. Concern for the environment provides a convenient cloak for sundry other agendas and environmentalism now encompasses a quasi-religious blend of new-age nature worship, junk science, left-wing political activism and anti-profit economics. Environmental regulation has been hijacked by activists, bureaucrats and researchers all of whom have a vested interest in promoting the idea of dire threats which of course require more regulation, more bureaucracy and more research.
Ironically, those who profess a deep concern for our precious environment tend to predominantly be urbanites who themselves choose to live in an environment where the natural world has been almost completely annihilated. Incongruous too is their fierce rejection of any suggestion that anything may not be a bad as they fear (or apparently hope).
Contrary to popular perception, in most developed countries the overall environmental condition has greatly improved over the past few decades and although much remains to be done the situation good and getting better. Real problems are quite sufficient. We do not need to waste effort and resources on imaginary ones.
Australia with its vast area, small population, remoteness, and high standard of living enjoys one of the least polluted, unspoiled natural environments of any nation. Unfortunately, environmental management here has tended to become dominated by ideology, theories, and a proliferation of bureaucracy with minimal assessment of either the real environment or the socio-economic consequences. Exacerbated by the precautionary principle the result has been a growing morass of restrictions and demands to address problems that often do not exist or that could be addressed by more effective, less burdensome measures. With a prosperity based predominantly on primary production ill-conceived environmental regulations are becoming a far more real threat to national security than is the danger of terrorism.
In the prevailing climate of political correctness concerning environmental matters few scientists are willing to speak out in opposition to the misrepresentation, suppression and outright fraud that is often being perpetrated in connection with environmental issues. At best it means being shunned by colleagues and almost certainly will have negative career consequences. I have because a combination of age and independence permit, knowledge and experience qualify, and sense of responsibility impel me to do so. The response from those on the receiving end of environmental mismanagement has been gratifying and the private agreement of many researchers surprising.
