BBC eco-propaganda like this is intended to make people feel insecure, fearful, and obedient.
The facts of the matter are unimportant to the producers, the commissioners or the institution. It's *all* story -- narrative.
No, 90% of the population do not "breathe in toxic air".
The facts of the matter are unimportant to the producers, the commissioners or the institution. It's *all* story -- narrative.
No, 90% of the population do not "breathe in toxic air".
Any claim like "90% of the population breathes in toxic air" needs qualification -- a 'so what'.
Even if it were true, what is the context? The entire population lives far longer than ever before.
What counts is what gets measured.
Even if it were true, what is the context? The entire population lives far longer than ever before.
What counts is what gets measured.
So, you can see, for instance in rapidly developing economies, that, yes, there is significant air pollution, and yes, that it requires some form of intervention. Building codes, standardisation, emissions limits. Just as what was developed here in the UK. But...
That process of rapid urbanisation is often the result of people seeking better lives for themselves, taking advantage of new economic opportunities, away from rural poverty.
In some case, where air pollution is worst, that means -- literally -- people escape dung and wood fires in tents, to urban housing.
So, yes, a team of ecological activists scientists from Western green NGOs can go to Mongolia, and measure the declining air quality. But...
So, yes, a team of ecological activists scientists from Western green NGOs can go to Mongolia, and measure the declining air quality. But...
They did not stick their air quality meters inside tents in the 1950s. And they eschew any such historical perspective.
That perspective reveals that, whereas infant mortality in the 1950s might be as high as 50%, today it will be 0.5%, despite "toxic air".
That perspective reveals that, whereas infant mortality in the 1950s might be as high as 50%, today it will be 0.5%, despite "toxic air".
I have raised this with the BBC. Their answer is "F*** OFF".
They don't care about the inconvenient facts. They don't care for context. They're not interested in historical perspective.
They are a propaganda outfit. End of story.
They don't care about the inconvenient facts. They don't care for context. They're not interested in historical perspective.
They are a propaganda outfit. End of story.
