The main concern of the writer in his article is about the scientists community who remained silent and just not putting the whole picture of human induced climate change and issues like global warming and sea level increase in front of the people. Their deliberate silence bring them good fortunes in the form of more research grants. There are pressures from certain quarters on scientists not to report actual situation and affects of climate change on ice sheets and sea level. This article goes on to discuss the climate changes and its affect on ice, ice sheet of Greenland and Western Antarctica, different models of non-linear and linear types to establish scientifically that what is and will be the actual situation if the human induced greenhouse gases emissions goes on. The writer goes on to discuss IPCC business as usual scenarios and different studies and literature on the climate changes to establish scientifically that the concern about ice sheet melting and sea level rise is not a hoax but it's a reality and it is actually not as reported by scientific community but even the more bigger issue. Article goes on to discuss the writer's personal experiences and his problems of real/ actual situations presentation. Article even goes on to discuss the difference between normal people and scientists and put some moral questions that scientists must have more responsibility to put across the actual pictures of any catastrophies, which will likely to happen in future. In reporting, scientists must take utmost care and their findings should be based on some scientific evidences. Article even goes on to say that for some governmental agencies like IPCC, reticence may be proper but as an individual scientists, they have to more responsible in reporting the effects of greenhouse gases on climate and must come out from their comfort zone and say something based on pure research and evidences. Doing so they may find it difficult and face resistance from most quarters.
This topic has a greater significance as we know that Regulations of various emissions and the whole topic of climate change and its broader effects has moved into political agenda so economists and others have entered the debate more prominently. As will be seen, serious addressing the enhanced greenhouse effect challenges the approach to resource allocation of mainstream economic. A range of subjects arise including; the objectivity of scientific information, asymmetry of costs and benefits over space and time, differentiation between risk and uncertainty, institutional power, over information and policy and the role of ethical judgment in decision process. Each is a major requiring research and posing serious challenges to the current conceptualization of pollution as a technical and scientific problem, which requires an engineered optimal solution. Similar problems have been and continue to oppose by other pollution " externalities". The difference in the case of the enhanced greenhouse effect is, how the issue confront the analyst simultaneously, are non separable and arise on a global scale. So in this way the article ignited the scientific community to come forward, leaving their own interests for the purpose of actual situational appraising in the larger interest of the people who are going to be affected by these climate changes more.
The concerns depicted by the author in his topic are widely covered in the topics related to