With a Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs who is dubious about the very existence of man-made climate change and who has cut spending in the area by over a quarter in the last year, what hope do we really have of defending ourselves against the changing weather, let alone attempting to bring it to a halt?
The vast majority of papers on climate science adhere to these principles, and indeed many papers devote the majority of their content to describing the hypotheses and methods used to tackle the particular problem being studied. However, the arguments that get bandied about in blogs and debates invariably focus solely on the predicted impacts of climate change, without any discussion of the caveats and assumptions that lie behind the models.
The government's "sweeteners", of 1% of shale gas revenues to local communities and handing local authorities all of the business rates arising from shale gas wells, can be seen as a financial compensation for the disruption fracking will cause locally. The introduction of climate change taxation would tackle the far greater global disruption that the climate effects of shale gas would otherwise bring.
This week's announcements on fracking, including David Cameron's pledge to "go all out on shale gas", triggered yet another shale gas frenzy in the UK media. Yet, despite all the hype and the announcement of better benefits for communities hosting shale gas projects, nothing has fundamentally changed when it comes to the likely impacts of shale gas on the UK's energy market.
If you think the National debate about the debt crisis has been vitriolic, then just wait until we reach the population tipping point. It will make the brouhaha surrounding George Osborne's strategy look like a quarrel at a kids party. But, if we really care about our legacy for the next generation, it's a debate that needs to happen.
Clawing our wealth to ourselves will not stop migration, nor will it mitigate the effects of climate change. The deification of money is leading many developed countries into a sterile siege mentality from which there is no long term good to be gained. The final irony is that the policies of the present government will make all that it seeks to prevent, much, much worse.
Warsaw revealed some serious divisions amongst groups of countries, and the language used became ever more heated. Indeed, the negotiations may well have raised the curtain on what will be some very difficult discussions when countries come forward with their 'contributions' from the end of next year.
Over the first week of the UN climate change negotiations in Poland we have seen the alarming results of studies showing increased decline of tropical forests. It is clear from newly available data from satellite monitoring stations that there are now growing areas being deforested as a result of illegal logging, agriculture and mining.
The global community simply cannot keep ignoring the desperate, passionate cries of people such as Naderev Saño. Millions around the world are already suffering greatly from the impacts of our fast changing climate and scientists keep telling us that such damage and disruption will only intensify in the years and decades ahead.