Text 1: Climate scientist Park argues that geoengineering — large- scale technical interventions to cool the climate — should remain off the table. Once introduced, she contends, techniques like stratospheric aerosol injection would lock humanity into ongoing deployment, with unknown ecological side effects and the risk of catastrophic termination shock if interrupted.
Text 2: Climate scientist Singh shares Park's concerns but argues against blanket refusal. As emissions reductions fall behind targets, geoengineering may become the lesser evil compared to runaway warming; refusing even to study it leaves humanity unprepared if such techniques become urgently needed. Caution, Singh contends, is not the same as silence.
Based on the texts, how would Singh (Text 2) most likely respond to Park's argument?
- A
He would endorse blanket prohibition of geoengineering research.
- B
He would propose that all emissions reductions be abandoned.
- Ccheck_circle
He would share many concerns while arguing that research preparation is justified given climate trajectories.
- D
He would deny that aerosol injection has any side effects.
Explanation
Singh shares concerns but rejects total refusal. B captures his position. A reverses; C and D contradict him.