Education environment: assholes denialists idiots media irresponsibility
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 8: I’d Like A Triple Oy With Vey-iz-Mir Sauce…
The denialist outlets are all a-twitter over James Lovelock’s recent remarks. The New York Daily News is a fine example:
Talk about an inconvenient truth: One of the scientists who most forcefully sounded the warning bells of climate change now says his predictions were a bit overheated.
Back in 2006, British environmentalist James Lovelock declared that “before this century is over, billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”
Lovelock and fellow believers helped lead Al Gore to become the Earth’s most famous climate warrior.
But, in an interview with MSNBC, Lovelock admitted that his dire predictions were, excuse us, hot air.
“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing,” he said. “We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books — mine included — because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.”
Almost wistfully, he noted: “We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.”
Assholes. Idiots. Sent April 29:
Yes, climate scientist James Lovelock, now 92, has drawn back a bit on his earlier apocalyptic forecasts. But it would be a very bad mistake to assume that climate change has now turned out to be a myth. That’s not what he said, that’s not what he meant, and that’s not a sensible response either to his words or to the climate crisis that is unfolding around us.
That Lovelock thinks we probably won’t face gigadeaths in the next few decades doesn’t mean climate change isn’t real. He, like other climatologists, is essentially a “planetary physician.” While it’s good news if your oncologist tells you that a tumor hasn’t spread as far or as fast as the worst-case predictions, that doesn’t mean you should start smoking again. Lovelock’s statement suggests simply that we have a tiny bit more time to change our ways before things get dangerously out of control.
Warren Senders
They published it, albeit in a highly edited form:
Medford, Mass.: Re “Hot air on climate change and the end of the world” (editorial, NYDailyNews.com, April 29): Yes, climate scientist James Lovelock has drawn back from his apocalyptic forecasts. But do not assume climate change is a myth. That Lovelock thinks we probably won’t face gigadeaths in the next few decades doesn’t mean climate change isn’t real. His statement simply suggests we have a bit more time to change our ways before things get out of control. Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes Barack Obama denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 7: Joyous Free And Flaming Youth Was Mine…
The Toledo Blade speaks sooth in a guest editorial titled “Serious On Climate Change”:
In an interview that Rolling Stone magazine published this week, President Obama said he thinks climate change will be a big issue in the coming election and that he will be “very clear” about his “belief that we’re going to have to take further steps to deal with climate change in a serious way.” That would be a welcome switch.
Dealing forthrightly with the world’s rising temperatures has been far down the list of priorities in Washington. The President has shown little willingness to stick his political neck out on the issue.
Mr. Obama’s attempts to revive the Democrats’ cap-and-trade plan during the 2010 election season quickly led to nothing. White House rollouts on energy policy have focused mostly on energy independence or green jobs but not on the global threat of warming.
Republicans deserve blame for stifling fair discussion of the issue. And Mr. Obama can cite some achievements: He pushed through landmark fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. He invested in renewable energy sources and energy efficiency through the stimulus. The Environmental Protection Agency has worked on greenhouse-gas rules.
But these won’t adequately attack the big problem: how Americans produce and consume energy, particularly electricity. That requires a robust, economy-wide solution, such as a carbon tax or a simple cap-and-trade program.
A generic “we better do something soon!” letter…not much time today, as I was dealing with a sudden influx of lumber from an unexpected source. Sent April 28:
Hamstrung as he is by obstructionist Republicans and a national media determined to downplay the urgency of the crisis, it’s remarkable that President Obama’s been able to do anything about climate change at all. He surely deserves credit for a re-energized EPA, more stringent fuel efficiency standards, and multiple other initiatives that have largely gone unnoticed in the hysteria attendant on the 24-hour news cycle and an impending presidential election.
But the laws of physics and chemistry don’t care about the daily polls, and despite the denialist rhetoric of conservatives who only accept scientific findings that support their ideological biases, the greenhouse effect is real. Mr. Obama’s readiness to speak out on this issue during the upcoming campaign is very welcome — but global warming isn’t subject to a majority vote. If our leaders cannot address the crisis, we’ll all be the losers regardless of the outcome this November.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes Canada denialists idiots
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 3: Mighty Lak A Rose…
I don’t usually pay much attention to Canadian politics. But recently the Wildrose party in Alberta has been attracting some attention with their remarkably stupid statements about climate change. The former PM of Norway has some choice words for these dingalings, in an interview in Toronto’s Globe and Mail:
The scientific basis for climate change has come under attack in Canada. Alberta’s Wildrose Party believes the link between human activity and global warming is inconclusive. How do you respond?
That is anti-scientific and naive. Politicians and others that question the science, that’s not the right thing to do. We have to base ourselves on evidence.
What message do you have for political leaders dealing with environmental issues?
It is important not to be influenced by, and inspired by, laissez-faire attitudes, which first had an impact before the [U.S.] financial crisis and [the BP oil spill] in the Gulf of Mexico. When you liberalize regulations, and you leave it more to companies, whether banks or oil companies, I don’t think this is the right way to go. You have to have governance. You must have serious and strict regulations.
She’s so sweet and forgiving, no? Not me. Sent April 24:
While many words come to mind when describing politicians who have embraced climate-change denial for electoral advantage, “naive,” the adjective employed by Gro Harlem Brundtland, is not one of them. To win the approval of conservative voters, Wildrose candidates are following the path marked out by Tea Party activists in the United States: reject ideologically problematic facts and expertise; exploit ignorance; sow confusion.
While voters may have many reasons for misunderstanding the work of climate scientists, politicians must be held to a higher standard. It is (or should be) their business to understand the real-world consequences of the policies they promote, and to take responsibility for the choices they advocate. The evidence for human causes of climate change is overwhelming and unequivocal; any politician arguing otherwise is either self-deluded or mendacious, and there is nothing ingenuous about either folly or lies. To describe denialism as “naive” is, well, naive.
Warren Senders
atheism Education environment Politics: apocalypse armageddon denialists eschatology evangelicals religion theology
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 2: A 50-Watt Bulb?
The faithful are opening their eyes. Or are they? The News Virginian reports — you decide:
In “The Global Warning Reader: A Century of Writing about Climate Change,” Dr. Bill McKibben presents “The Evangelical Climate Change Initiative,” a 2006 document signed by 86 American Christian evangelical leaders. Signers include: Rick Warren (“The Purpose Driven Life”); W. Todd Bassett, National Commander of the Salvation Army; Ron Sider, President of Evangelicals for Social Action; and advisors and columnists for Christianity Today magazine. “In the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord,” they said, “we urge all who read this declaration to join us in this effort” of teaching and acting on the following four claims.
1. “Human-Induced Climate Change is Real.” Among the evidence the signers studied was that collected by the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) whose 1988-2002 chairman, John Houghton, is a committed Christian. They remembered that the science was settled enough for the Bush Administration to state in a 2004 report, and then at the 2005 G-8 summit, that humans were responsible for “at least some of it (climate change).” The IPCC, however, holds that human activities are responsible for “most of the warming,” according to the evangelical leaders.
2. “The Consequences of Climate Change Will Be Significant, and Will Hit the Poor the Hardest.” The signers emphasized the impact of even the smallest increases in human-caused world-wide temperature upon people in poor countries: tropical diseases, hurricanes, flooding, reduction in food crops, famine, and the vulnerability of refugees to exploitation and violence, even internal and external military oppression. “Millions of people,” they wrote, “could die in this century because of climate change.” They also noted the destruction it could bring to “God’s other creatures.”
I’m not going to take this one on faith. Sent April 23:
The rejection of climate change has long been a shibboleth of political conservatives, who have a record of denying inconvenient facts and expertise that goes back at least fifty years. Why, then, are evangelicals — one of the most consistently conservative voting blocs in the country — beginning to accept the scientific reality of global warming? While some may be encouraged, I am less sanguine about the motivations behind the faithful’s abandonment of long-held denialist positions.
Environmentalists are interested in the long-term survival of the planet; talk to a “tree-hugger” and you’ll hear someone whose worries about humanity’s future in the year 3000 motivate them to conservation and the wise use of resources. By contrast, evangelicals eagerly anticipating the End Times may have little reason to practice sustainability. Is climate-change acceptance among conservative Christians accompanied by a growing conviction that industrialized humanity needs to change its ways to avoid catastrophe? Or are they cheering on the burgeoning greenhouse effect, assuming that the souls of the faithful will be providentially rescued from a disaster of Biblical proportions?
Warren Senders
environment Politics: Arctic ice melt assholes denialists idiots military Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 26: If I Make My Lips Go B-B-B-B-B-B, I Can Pretend To Be A Motorcycle
More on the military plans for a transformed climate, from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
Russia, Canada and the United States have the biggest stakes in the Arctic. With its military budget stretched thin by Iraq, Afghanistan and more pressing issues elsewhere, the United States has been something of a reluctant northern power, though its nuclear-powered submarine fleet, which can navigate for months underwater and below the ice cap, remains second to none.
Russia — one-third of which lies within the Arctic Circle — has been the most aggressive in establishing itself as the emerging region’s superpower.
Rob Huebert, an associate political science professor at the University of Calgary in Canada, said Russia has recovered enough from its economic troubles of the 1990s to significantly rebuild its Arctic military capabilities, which were a key to the overall Cold War strategy of the Soviet Union, and has increased its bomber patrols and submarine activity.
He said that has in turn led other Arctic countries — Norway, Denmark and Canada — to resume regional military exercises that they had abandoned or cut back on after the Soviet collapse. Even non-Arctic nations such as France have expressed interest in deploying their militaries to the Arctic.
Don’t ask me to explain the headline of this post. Sent April 17:
It was a mantra for Republicans when discussing proposals to end America’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan: the only authorities worth consulting were the “generals in the field.” But conservatives don’t always revere military opinion. Those same lawmakers will certainly do their best to ignore the fact that our armed forces are hard at work, planning for a geopolitical future transformed by climate change.
Because, of course, it’s another conservative mantra: climate change isn’t real (if it is real, it’s a socialist conspiracy; scientists want to raise our taxes!). Given that the loudest voices rejecting the science of global warming belong to the senators and representatives who once vociferously touted the ultimate authority of our military leaders, how can these legislators possibly recognize the existence of the U.S. Navy’s task force on climate change?
Wouldn’t it be nice if environmental policy was based on scientific reality instead of political ideology?
Warren Senders
environment Politics: armed forces assholes denialists idiots military Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 24: Paisley and Patchouli
The Minnesota Star-Tribune addresses the newest addition to the Hippie Ranks:
YOKOSUKA, Japan — To the world’s military leaders, the debate over climate change is long over. They are preparing for a new kind of Cold War in the Arctic, anticipating that rising temperatures there will open up a treasure trove of resources, long-dreamed-of sea lanes and a slew of potential conflicts.
By Arctic standards, the region is already buzzing with military activity, and experts believe that will increase significantly in the years ahead.
Last month, Norway wrapped up one of the largest Arctic maneuvers ever — Exercise Cold Response — with 16,300 troops from 14 countries training on the ice for everything from high intensity warfare to terror threats. Attesting to the harsh conditions, five Norwegian troops were killed when their C-130 Hercules aircraft crashed near the summit of Kebnekaise, Sweden’s highest mountain.
The U.S., Canada and Denmark held major exercises two months ago, and in an unprecedented move, the military chiefs of the eight main Arctic powers — Canada, the U.S., Russia, Iceland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland — gathered at a Canadian military base last week to specifically discuss regional security issues.
I ought to be able to get a couple more letters out of this story. It’d be fun to mock Darrell Issa even if there was no climate crisis. Sent April 16:
If we are to judge by their plans and strategic preparations, there’s no doubt that America’s military establishment is taking climate change seriously.
This raises the troubling possibility that the armed forces have been infiltrated by an international conspiracy of climate scientists, tree-hugging environmentalists, and socialist college professors, in which case we can expect soldiers to start confiscating SUVs and hauling their drivers off to compulsory re-education camps. This is surely an obvious place for a stalwart anti-environmentalist like Representative Darrell Issa to start an investigation. The House Oversight Committee, which Issa chairs, needs to start issuing subpoenas; let’s get to the bottom of this!
But wait — could it be that military analysts know something these legislators don’t? Perhaps in their eagerness to pander to the tea-partiers in their district, congressional climate-change denialists have been ignoring facts that don’t suit their ideologies. Perhaps the corporations that fund their campaigns have more influence on our lawmakers than the opinions of our nation’s military leaders.
I don’t know. Sounds pretty far-fetched to me.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes denialists idiots irresponsibility James Hansen scientific consensus
by Warren
2 comments
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 23: Houston, You Have A Problem…
The Houston Chronicle reports on the latest cloud of bafflegab from the denialist masterminds:
Four dozen former NASA astronauts, engineers and scientists have written a letter to the space agency decrying its advocacy of “catastrophic” climate change.
“As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate,” states the letter, addressed to administrator Charles Bolden.
“We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”
Among the signatories are seven Apollo astronauts, including Harrison “Jack” Schmitt and Walt Cunningham, and two former directors of Johnson Space Center.
Although not explicitly named in their letter, the 49 signatories are unhappy with the outspoken head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, James Hansen, who is one of the world’s most prominent climate scientists.
Jackasses. Sent April 14:
When a planetary physician of the highest possible stature excoriates those who are hindering meaningful action on climate change, it’s news. “A moral issue comparable with slavery” — strong words from James Hansen, a man with unimpeachable scientific credentials and a self-evident ethical core. How can those poor oppressed conservative think-tanks fight back? It’s a standard move in the climate-change denial business: when something happens that might move public opinion even a little bit toward recognition of a global emergency, they’ll launch a Letter Signed By Many People (LSBMP).
Dr. Hansen is a NASA employee? They’ll counter with an LSBMP signed by forty-nine NASA astronauts and engineers (including a few scientists for good measure). Sounds impressive, but none of the signatories are climate scientists. Their use of the LSBMP to deliver spurious expertise confirms the moral force of Dr. Hansen’s argument. The scientific argument, of course, was settled long ago.
Warren Senders
atheism Education environment Politics: assholes denialists evolution idiots Republicans theocracy
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 20: He That Troubleth His Own House…
This is entirely expected — but it still sucks:
NASHVILLE — Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam today allowed a controversial bill allowing teachers to discuss the “weaknesses” of evolution and other scientific theories to become law without his signature.
It is the first time Haslam, a Republican, has refused to sign a bill passed by the GOP-led General Assembly.
The legislation has been derided by critics nationwide as a modern-day “monkey bill,” a reference to a 1920s Tennessee law that outlawed the teaching of evolution and spurred the arrest and trial of Dayton, Tenn., teacher John Scopes in the infamous 1925 “Monkey Trial.”
“I have reviewed the final language of HB 368/SB 893 and assessed the legislation’s impact,” Haslam said in a statement. “I have also evaluated the concerns that have been raised by the bill. I do not believe that this legislation changes the scientific standards that are taught in our schools or the curriculum that is used by our teachers.
“However,” Haslam added, “I also don’t believe that it accomplishes anything that isn’t already acceptable in our schools.”
I wish they’d never been allowed to rejoin the Union. Sent April 11:
Although he’s allowing HB 368/SB 893 to become law without his signature, Governor Haslam cannot avoid soiling his fingers on a dirty piece of legislation. The bill’s language is entirely disingenuous. It is absolutely obvious that this is an attempt to undermine a genuine and robust scientific consensus under the guise of “discussing the weaknesses” in scientific opinion on evolution and climate change.
Will Tennessee’s teachers really explore the relationship between feedback and forcing in climate models — or will they promulgate attractive and convenient pseudo-facts (“carbon dioxide is our friend!”) offered by well-funded denialist groups? Will they explore the relationship between punctuated equilibrium and phyletic gradualism in our understanding of evolution — or will they offer attractive and convenient pseudo-facts from well-funded creationist groups?
When the world’s climate is perilously close to spinning entirely out of equilibrium, we can no longer afford the luxury of substituting ignorance for knowledge under the guise of “teaching the controversy.” This will not end well — for Tennessee, for America, or for the world.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes denialists idiots media irresponsibility timescale
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 18: More Pathetic Whining From Aggrieved Hippies
The Lincoln, NE Journal-Star has an editorial. It’s shrill:
Temperatures have retreated to levels closer to the norm in Lincoln, but the heavy green foliage of trees and the profusion of blooming flowers bear witness that March 2012 was the warmest on record in the Capital City.
Pleasant as it was, the numbers represent an extreme.
The average high was 69.5 degrees, 17.2 degrees above normal. The temperature soared to 91 degrees March 31, setting a record for that day and tying the all-time high for March. It was the second record daily high set during the month. A high of 83 degrees on March 13 topped the previous record of 80 degrees.
Still fresh in memory is the weather extreme of 2011, when snow and rain created record runoff of more than 60 million acre-feet of water in the Missouri River basin. The usual runoff is 24.8 million acre-feet. The previous record was 49 million acre-feet.
Such weather extremes should be expected more frequently as global warming continues, according to a new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 2010, Russia recorded its hottest summer in 500 years. Last year, rainfall in Thailand was 80 percent more than average.
“It’s very clear that heat waves are on the increase both in terms of numbers and duration,” said Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the panel. “Another important finding is the fact that extreme precipitation events are on the increase.”
It’s often been said during the debate on global warming that “weather is not climate.” Weather is short-term. Climate is long-term.
Still, it’s worth remembering that in January the USDA released a new plant hardiness zone map that showed most of Nebraska is in a warmer zone than it was in 1990, the last time the map was updated.
The USDA cautioned that the change was based on only 30 years of weather data gathered from 1976 to 2005, and should not be considered evidence of global warming. The trend would have to persist for 50 or 100 years to be considered climate change, the USDA said.
So, in a long-term sense, the warmest March on record for Lincoln is just another dot that must be connected to many others to be considered a trend. Nonetheless, on a 91-degree March afternoon, it was difficult to believe that some still deny that global warming is real.
I haven’t checked the comments yet. I’m sure they’re full of denialist drivel. Sent April 9:
Yes, the unseasonably warm temperatures are a troubling omen of a future in which climatic extremes become the new norm — but they’re unlikely to change the mind of the climate change denialists who long ago decided global warming is a hoax/conspiracy/liberal plot. A mere plenitude of evidence would hardly be enough to convince people who have repeatedly shown their contempt for scientific truth, and indeed for science itself. The multi-decade effort by the Republican party to base policy on ideology rather than facts has been assisted by a complaisant media establishment that for years has abdicated journalistic responsibility in favor of a specious false equivalency between opposing viewpoints; the result may well be toxic to the survival of our civilization and our species. We — all of us — need to be thinking about the long term; if humanity is to succeed, both our politics and media must be transformed. Ideologically motivated ignorance is a luxury our species can no longer afford.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes denialists hockey stick Michael Mann
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 17: Hockey Fights
Looks like Asheville, North Carolina had a visit from Dr. Michael Mann, and Katie Rose-Anderson writes it up for the Mountain Express:
If you chart global temperature changes in last 1,000 years or so, the resulting graph looks like a hockey stick.
Climatologist Michael Mann published that conclusion in 1998, and he’s still explaining what the data means and how a simple graph became a controversial icon in the debate over whether human-caused climate change is happening.
On April 3, he spoke at Warren Wilson College, offering about 60 attendees a glimpse into his new book, The Hockey Stick and The Climate Wars. “I thought if I could write the book, I could explain why people discredit science,” said Mann. “We have to be more effective in presenting scientific truth.”
Since publishing the Hockey Stick in 1998, he has had his email hacked and picked apart for the purpose of incriminating and discrediting his studies; his family has received death threats, which was apparent at the presentation: A small security team escorted Mann.
Nobody should have to undergo what Mann’s had to undergo. Sent April 8:
Modern conservatism is nothing but a framework for rejecting inconvenient facts and the people who deliver them. Just ask Dr. Michael Mann, whose work has been attacked for years by powerful corporate interests. Over and over they’ve claimed that that his results are falsified, that he is guilty of academic malfeasance, that he has manipulated his results — and over and over Mann has been vindicated.
And has it made a bit of difference? Nope; the petrol-funded denialist industry cares more about its short-term bottom line than either the ethics of their egregious misrepresentations or the long-term survival of our species. For make no mistake, Mann’s research will be foundational for humanity’s struggle over the coming centuries, as we try to make sense of a world drastically transformed by a rapidly and chaotically changing climate. Conservatism’s anti-science stance must disqualify it from any status as a legitimate political philosophy.
Warren Senders