Some interesting points made here. Without wanting to target individual replies, I would like to remark on the following...

- Some people may have difficulty in appreciating the difference between what they themselves don't know and what science itself doesn't know;

- The media twist and exaggerate all stories, there is always an agenda. It is indeed always necessary to see who funds what research. Academia is of course subject to market forces and differences in opinion;

- I'm not sure if science is a belief system, I think this depends upon how the individual approaches it; there is plenty of bad science out there (e.g. the pseudo-science theories that appeal to certain types of 'believer'), but somehow, as has been observed, the better science tends to last. Unlike religion, science relies on evidence and can evolve;

- Anyone coming from a religious standpoint is obviously happy to believe in certain things without having any evidence for them, so it seems odd to then come to the dialectic criticising others for their lack of evidence;

- I think we can all see that the climate is changing; most likely augmented to some unknown extent by anthropogenic activity, flippancy is easy in those whose homes and livelihoods are not affected by an increase in climate variability or rising sea levels.

- People have been predicting a 'population bomb' since at least the 1960s: mass famines, armageddon etc etc but so far it has yet to come to light. Almost everywhere in the world people are living healthier, longer lives now than ever before.

But back to the original thought; no, I don't think this will have any real effect on overland travel!

__________________
EurasiaOverland a memoir of one quarter of a million kilometres by road through all of the Former USSR, Western and Southern Asia.