Sunday, February 10, 2008

Can every current "problem" really be the most important one in the history of the world?

I'm having a real hard time keeping my apocalypses straight.

This afternoon's article says:
A call for world action last week sounded as familiar as, say, that against global warming. But while a UN report did warn of a "catastrophe" in the 21st century, the topic wasn't the usual greenhouse gases. It was tobacco smoking.

In terms of global priorities to save lives, the math alone argues for as much attention to be paid to tobacco addiction as to climate change – maybe even more.
Earlier today, it was dying bees that could "wipe out mankind".

Just last night, we were told that global warming could be a bigger threat than nuclear war.

Two or three weeks ago, water shortages were supposed to be at the top of the world's agenda.

So what are the top priorities now? Bees, then cigarettes, then lack of water, then maybe nukes and carbon dioxide? Should things like terrorism, war, hunger, poverty, disease etc be somewhere on the list as well?

No comments: