Apparently not, the source, The Register is a UK based tech Internet outfit, very good for exploration of contemporary policy BS. In the article the author takes a critical look at some alarming science concerning crazy sea-level rise. One of the more interesting islands on the web, El Reg is more trustworthy that the Simian Johan Hari, the much awarded (rewarded?) gimpoid journalist who seems to have penned the concept of 'climate terror'. Its really not funny. The Independent should know better.
The copy-cat quoters of the NewAge and Daily Star newspapers of Bangladesh are about as irrelevant as their readerships i guess. These three sources used the prof's 25 metre sea level rise by 2100 to dramatise their agendas. They wrongly attributed scientific capital to the calculation to woo a lay audience. Shame on them. It is the wrong use of aql. Reminds me of the bro in Gaibandha, commenting on thought leadership in his experience, i think he'd been through quite a bit, been displaced by the river, had his commmunity of freinds and family scattered by the twists of bad fortune... but he was scratching out a living on the riverbank and making the best that he could.
"Here, the educated people make fools of the uneducated"
Practically, there are so many unanswered questions that must be followed up on. Satellite monitoring of polar ice coverage doesn't address the issue of VOLUME. Is there sufficient scientific capital in the South, unbeholden to the captive mind complex, that can demonstrate some kind of mojo?
Climate change is real and mysterious. It acts as another interacting layer to the general environmental change, the amplitude of which is quite high in Bangladesh. There are so many disciplines that need to fire their guns at it, and disciplines which need to be created to actually pursue it that the mind boggles.
With a political class paralysed by democratic deadlock and self interest, a pseudo intelligentsia drunk on international ideological trends and development dollars, and a university sector starved of local resources. Who is going to actually do the work that needs to be done?
Some have picked up on climate change in the same way they picked up on other funding source vocabulary. Womens empowerment, povery alleviation, human rights, modernisation, civil society you name it... its been simulated and rendered meaningless, despite any element of truth to the ideas. Its the same old story, the boy who cried wolf perhaps?
We must be fundamental in our re-examination of the natures and characters of knowledge, research activity and society. I dont know how the coastal zone, the rivers and the people are going to deal with eachother, but this BS must be discredited and supersceded.