2082 (The Chronicles of Hope Book 1), page 1
Table of Contents
ONE
TWO
THREE
FOUR
FIVE
SIX
SEVEN
EIGHT
NINE
TEN
ELEVEN
TWELVE
THIRTEEN
FOURTEEN
FIFTEEN
SIXTEEN
SEVENTEEN
EIGHTEEN
NINETEEN
TWENTY
TWENTY ONE
TWENTY TWO
TWENTY THREE
TWENTY FOUR
TWENTY FIVE
TWENTY SIX
TWENTY SEVEN
Copyright © Robert Breeze 2013
Published by Palace Park Press, 2013.
The right of Robert Breeze to be identified as the Author of the Work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
This book is sold subject to the condition it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise be circulated in any form or by any means, electronic or otherwise without the publisher’s prior consent.
Cover artwork by Chandler Book Design ©
ISBN 978-1-909121-16-4
Twitter: @RobertBreeze
facebook: the chronicles of hope
www.thechroniclesofhope.com
ONE
GOD HELP US SUN
Frank Noon wasn’t the most articulate of men. He was a fiercely intelligent, visionary thinker possessing many of the qualities that had been lacking for so long in British politicians – most notably honesty, integrity and character.
But he could swear like a punk rocker.
He was a strong man, outwardly and inwardly. Standing just over six feet tall, he was the archetype of tall, dark and handsome. His strong frame showed off the best aspect of his outer strength: a good–looking, physically fit man with a well-groomed body established over several years of gruelling daily training. His favourite sport was boxing and his regimented fitness regime drew a lot from that passion. His inner strength was moulded by years of fighting against and alongside the predictable views of the robotic face fitters fast-tracked from public schools into the House of Commons. Frank himself came through the state education system and was stoically proud of the fact.
He’d been the elected Labour MP for a small constituency in North Oxfordshire for some twenty years and he regularly experienced intense frustration as he fought to create change from within. In truth, the insipid British political system ensured that Frank was never a viable political option in mainline politics, his revolutionary thoughts on society deemed certain to alienate the masses. Satisfied that his intellect and aptitude saw that he was respected privately by a great many of his political peers, thoughts of quitting the political arena had nevertheless recently crossed his mind.
His latest gripe was the world’s increasing obsession with climate change, the environment and everything green. A topically popular subject this may well be, and a sure vote-winner across a large demographic, but Frank didn’t subscribe to its merits. This was highlighted to many during his recent speech at a conference of all the frontline political parties regarding climate change.
Frank had never before had the opportunity to speak at such great length in the House of Commons, his stoic nature translating badly to his peers and the electorate. Blissfully unaware of the process behind the decision to allow him a voice, Frank had been preparing his rhetoric for days, determined to craftily use this opportunity to address wider issues. Practice in front of a mirror at home the night before was abandoned when his vanity turned it into an arduous task, so instead he briefed the youngest of his three daughters to be his Commons speaker.
Frank had never been the best public speaker, and by the time his moment came he was visibly nervous and fumbling, his written guide only staying in his hands due to the adhesive qualities of his moist palms.
‘There are a number of points I’d like to make on the subject of climate change, and the world’s ever increasing compulsion to direct most of its resources towards combating it,’ he said, enunciating every syllable with great care to ensure the utmost clarity.
‘There are three key questions you should be addressing. Is global warming the threat you should be worrying about? How has it become an issue? What does the future entail? In addressing the first of those I’d argue it’s been completely over-hyped, regardless of whether you’re talking about a threat to the human race or a threat to the planet, which are themselves two very separate issues.
‘Let’s start scientifically, as we always should, and note that global warming is simply the climate changing. As climate change alters environments, pressures will be exerted on technology to preserve them, but unlike in biological evolution, the progress that’s made anywhere is instantly available everywhere. This yields an evolutionary feedback loop directly proportional to the extent of the pressure, which could only be overwhelmed by pressures so extreme and rapid that the foundations of civilisation are destroyed before progress has time to cycle.’
He risked his first glance at the audience and forcibly upped the tone and volume of his voice to signal the onset of the crux of his argument.
‘Here’s the key point: virtually everyone in the scientific community acknowledges this worst-case scenario will not happen; there is a complete lack of evidence that it will happen; and the notion that the laws of the universe so precisely conspire against us that disaster strikes at exactly the time in human history just before we could deal with it, is preposterous. Global warming is simply the climate changing and, as it does, we’ll evolve and adapt. That’s by far the most likely scenario, according to the experts, according to science, so most of you here breathe a big sigh of relief. Going forward you people can consider climate change and react accordingly in order to combat potential problems – for example I’m told that natural climate change may lead to more flooding over the next hundred years, so you lot can get experts on board and react accordingly to things like that.’
Frank stopped temporarily to find his breath and assess his audience’s reaction. Noting the thoughtful – though Frank disdainfully amused and confused silence from his peers in the room, he continued unabated.
‘Me, I’m not as self-important; I don’t really care about the future of the human race. These people who bang on about saving the planet, it’s not the planet they want to save, the planet doesn’t need saving, they’re concerned solely with preserving the planet so the human race lives on and on, a massive distinction that people fail to make. It must be. China are without doubt the biggest investors in everything green yet at the same time its hunger for raw materials is the most destructive force being exerted on the environment worldwide. That paradox and hypocrisy must confirm that it’s definitely the future of the human race you’re concerned about and not the future of the planet as some self-righteous environmentalists would have us believe. Don’t feel guilty about admitting this fact, because the planet’s going to be absolutely fine regardless. The planet’s been here for four billion odd years, us only for 200,000 years or so, so I think we can conclude that 200 years of industrialisation won’t threaten a planet that’s been through disasters and natural scientifically verifiable phenomena that we barely understand.
‘So, if you can accept that your desire to save the human race is entirely selfish and not anything to do with our precious planet I can give you a few tips. I’ve already highlighted that scientists are sceptical about global warming being any sort of immediate threat to the human race, but there are threats to the human race, very real and consistent threats to world peace. They mostly stem from conflicts around the world caused by that oh so fictional hypothesis, religion. Over the years, more people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason. Now, if the masses believe in something fictional and it makes them happy, and easier for you to control them, then I see why you’re happy to perpetuate the myth, but when religious fundamentalism is responsible for most of the atrocities in the world today, when this fictional thing threatens the whole of humanity, surely you should be saying enough’s enough? If the future of the human race is so precious to you then I don’t understand why you’re concentrating so much on global warming when the religious, extremist, terrorist threat – combined with the advances in weaponry we’re likely to see over the next hundred years, and the rise of Russia and China – are all winning the race quite comfortably. Which do you really think is more of an immediate threat to the future of the human race, greenhouse gases or nuclear bombs? If I were you, I’d think about how you can eliminate and educate against these threats. It really wouldn’t be hard to do, the material is right there for you. Over two hundred years ago now a genius, Charles Darwin, came along and scientifically proved that we’re here not because we were magically created, but because we evolved. Two hundred odd years on, and millions of us around the world are still ignoring it. The government of the time could and should have acted upon that information, but it didn’t. Every government since could have acted upon that information, but they haven’t. We’ve been afforded these great, complicated, intricate minds, we could’ve been such worthy beings, and yet we’ve completely squandered that gift, we’ve let ourselves be controlled by things like religion and superstition. It’s embarrassing and it’s why I no longer have much care for mankind. Your answer’s probably called Humanism you know. Try brainwashing people into t hat as you did with religion’, he spat, each you, delivering the word more venomously with every utterance.
‘You could encourage an honest society based on intelligent, scientific reasoning rather than fiction and perpetuate simply the correct and proper view that we can make sense of the world using reason, experience and share human values and that we can live good lives without religious or superstitious beliefs. It’d be such a step forward in human civilisation’
His voice was now cracking, leading to an uncomfortable pause as he took a breath and tried to bite some moisture into his lips. The pause allowed the Speaker of the House to interject and politely remind Frank that time was a pressing issue.
‘I’ll plough on, for those of you still brainwashed and panicking about the planet being under threat, how has it become an issue and why the planet is under some pressure. That word why. The one we never consider and yet the one we should ask most regularly, all of us, every single day. We deduce that the planet’s under pressure and our solution is to recycle more? The solution should be to ask why the planet’s under pressure and get to the root cause. I’ve obviously been bored lately so I’ve done this and I can reveal that the two root causes are overpopulation combined with our relentless obsession with material goods. It’s obvious how overpopulation pressurises the planet’s resources, but essentially the pursuit of goods and the energy used by these goods is what is exhausting the planet’s resources. Again, to get to the root cause we have to ask why, so lets put the latest gadget down and do just that. Essentially it’s capitalism, marketing, advertising and the media. The key to life is happiness, everyone subscribes to that, but over the last hundred years or so we’ve been brainwashed into thinking that the acquisition of material goods is what leads to happiness. That belief is now driving societies all around the world, including China, India, and increasingly in the third world. It really doesn’t for the majority of people, certainly not when you reach a certain level of comfort that most of us have in the developed world. Changing that belief is what will release the pressure valve on the planet, and hey, maybe you could all save a few quid a year on bags for life as well.’
‘Order, order!’ shouted the Speaker of the House.
The dissidents, mainly from the opposition party, rightfully pointed to the change of subject as contravening house rules. The speaker showed Frank the respect of letting him continue largely because of a thinly veiled plea outside had just enough of a hint of a threat about it to ensure compliance.
‘I’ll carry on, what does the future entail? If the major change that’s needed is deemed too provocative and visionary for the world’s leaders to take then there are two clear paths I think it could take. One is towards war, destruction, repression and the like, and it’s one that’s not particularly cheery but by far the most likely. If you’re an optimist however, not like me, then there is another path you could take, the key to which is education. You shouldn’t have to be rich to get an education and our priority should be educating every single person to a higher standard now so that we’ll reap the rewards in the future. We’ve got to stop going for the quick-fix option, realise we can’t change things significantly for this generation or the next, and concentrate instead on educating people worldwide. Putting that in place now could be your legacy.
‘Alongside this global education policy, we could direct our resources into making sure the third world develops, that no one struggles for the basic needs of food and water. Currently we’re obsessed with trying to preserve the planet for future generations when we haven’t even sorted out the current generation. Droughts have been causing famines in Africa for years and we’ve turned a blind eye, yet as soon as we get a slightly warmer summer here we panic, worry and obsess about things like plastic bags.
‘Consider all the disadvantaged people and the homeless in the developed world. Consider all the poverty in the third world. Instead of ploughing money into preserving the planet, how about we make sure that as many people as possible on this planet now can live free from abject poverty? We need to advocate sweeping and necessary social change. These solutions are long–term but they are your only options. Educated people would realise that long term there’ll either be a world without war or there won’t be a world, at least not as we know it.’
There was still no visible response or movement in the room, and as he approached the last page of his notes he decided to put down his notes and ad-lib, desperate to try and provoke some kind of response from the House.
‘So, what do I think will happen? I suspect that you’ll choose to ignore the scientific evidence on subjects like this in favour of blindly following the prescribed brainwashed path; a path carved out by politicians obsessed with vote-winning thoughts, a path that green taxes pay for, and a path inevitably leading to the elites levying global taxes. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be green and do what we can, recycle where possible et cetera, et cetera. Of course we should do that. What I’m saying is that there are far more immediate and pressing problems that we should be concentrating on. People that say things about climate change leading to an irreversible and dangerous new era, let me assure you Earth – the planet, the awe-inspiring, amazing planet that’s been through earthquakes, volcanoes, natural disasters and ice ages – it will be absolutely fine, it’ll evolve and adapt. The human race might not be fine but you know what, maybe we’ve had our chance and ruined it, maybe we should let another species have a shot. If you really cared about the planet then your hope would probably be that the human race is wiped out soon before we develop even more powerful technology and weaponry that we’d use to cause even more destruction. If you really wanted to finally treat the planet with a little respect then let’s stop this arrogance of seeing ourselves as these all-conquering beings that preserve the planet for our own species by riding roughshod over it and manipulating nature. And who are we to be messing with it anyway? Things evolve, species die out. As this planet evolves, maybe animals or other species, possibly more advanced robotic species, or bacteria, will prosper. There was an age of reptiles, now it’s the age of primates, maybe next it’ll be the age of insects or rodents, and maybe it’s time they had a go considering we’re the only species on earth that murder and torture our own species and other species, and sexually abuse our young.’
Frank was now sporadically mopping his brow, beads of sweat threatening to surf down the bridge of his nose as he edged towards his conclusion.
‘And also no one ever takes into account the uncertainty of it all. We don’t really know what will happen. Maybe a meteorite will wipe out the human race in two hundred years’ time. What happens when we get a virus that is both airborne and deadly? Or a bacteria that’s resistant to all currently existing drugs? Anyway to conclude, you people here with power, you have to realise that the survival of your species is a fragile matter at this point. I’m just lying back here watching the show but you’re not going to have long to make this decision for the sake of the survival of your species. Somebody observing all this from another planet would not put very high odds on human survival. I think one day history might see all this as a big joke, that humans didn’t really do much for about 250,000 years, but then for a thousand years my god did they screw things up. Who knows, maybe if we carry on down this path with such a ridiculous divide between rich and poor then the rich might even start breeding their own super-race whilst everyone else is left behind, it’d almost literally be like a giant form of super-rat taking over Earth.
‘As for the general public and anyone alive now watching, please know that there’s nothing to fear. There is definite scientific uncertainty about the speed of the change, but even if you said it was fifty times faster than we thought, that still wouldn’t significantly affect the planet in the next few hundred years – by which time you’ll be long gone, and anyone you feel a vague connection to will be long gone too. It might sound clinical, but people mustn’t be scared to realise that these are by far the most likely scenarios. You only live once, so just quit worrying about the future. People worry about everything now, everything all the time. Live your life now to the full.’
