Dear Editor: Seems there was this French genius back in the 17th century named Blaise Pascal. As a boy, and later as a young man, he was into math, but later, at the ripe old age of 31, he switched his life calling to a more religious persuasion.
While writing some of his religious musings called his Pensees during this latter period, he reverted to his earlier calling as a mathematician when he proposed what has become known as "Pascal’s Wager." In this, Pascal makes the argument for the existence of God on a basis of mathematics, more specifically, probability.
In this “Wager” he poses that "If God does not exist, a person will lose nothing by believing in Him, but if God does exist a person will lose everything by not believing in Him."
I would carry this same logic to a more current and, I think, existential threat. The existence and threat that climate change poses (think our latest wind storm). Look at it this way. If climate change and its related effects does not exist we will lose little by believing and acting as though it does exist, but if climate change and its dangers do pose a threat as essentially all scientists agree, then we will lose everything by not believing and acting on this belief.
Call your representatives today and instruct them to act on your behalf.
Send your letter to the editor to firstname.lastname@example.org. Include your full name, hometown and phone number. Your name and town will be published. The phone number is for verification purposes only. Please keep your letter to 250 words or less.