Education environment Politics: assholes denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 15: Harper Valley PTA
Neela Banerjee writes in the LA Times about Tennessee’s embarrassing new legislation, which is eagerly awaiting its gubernatorial flourish before slime-spattering students throughout the state:
WASHINGTON — Tennessee is poised to adopt a law that would allow public schoolteachers to challenge climate change and evolution in their classrooms without fear of sanction, according to educators and civil libertarians in the state.
Passed by the state Legislature and awaiting Republican Gov. Bill Haslam’s signature, the measure is likely to stoke growing concerns among science teachers around the country that teaching climate science is becoming the same kind of classroom and community flash point as evolution. If it becomes law, Tennessee will become the second state, after Louisiana, to allow the teaching of alternatives to accepted science on climate change.
The Tennessee measure does not require the teaching of alternatives to scientific theories of evolution, climate change, human cloning and “the chemical origins of life.” Instead, the legislation would prevent school administrators from reining in teachers who expound on alternative hypotheses to those topics.
The measure’s primary sponsor, Republican state Sen. Bo Watson, said it was meant to give teachers the clarity and security to discuss alternative ideas to evolution and climate change that students may have picked up at home and want to explore in class.
Morons. Sorry — that should be Morans; my bad. Sent April 7:
When contemporary conservatives want schools to “teach the controversy,” it’s a sure bet they’re referring to controversies they’ve created themselves. Tennessee’s new legislation is an excellent example of this; the notion that science teachers are somehow restricted by requiring them to actually teach science is a fabrication of the evangelical subset of American conservatism.
The arguments within climatology concern the details of feedback and forcing mechanisms in Earth’s environment, and what they portend for the future of the planet and its inhabitants; the human causes of global warming are as fully settled as the basic processes of Darwinian evolution. Assertions to the contrary are either mendacious or ignorant; probably both.
But what the hell — let’s teach the controversy: is Marxist economics valid? Is the Earth flat? Does your astrological sign influence your life? Is Elvis alive? Is Paul dead? Is there really a Flying Spaghetti Monster? Welcome to school.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 4, Day 13: Whodunnit?
Krishneil Narayan writes in the Fiji Times, attempting to clarify an important distinction:
There is always much confusion between the terms Global Warming and Climate Change (CC). Many a times, people young and old, find it difficult to define these terms and use it interchangeably. But to tackle the devastating impacts of the changing climate and its threats to humanity, it is important to be able to differentiate the fine line stuck between the two.
The international scientific community agrees that there has been a significant change in global climate in recent years. The Earth’s climate is changing at an alarming rate.
In most places around the world, average temperatures are rising. Scientists have observed a warming trend beginning around the late 1800s.
According to the leading international scientific body for the assessment of climate change consisting of some 4000 climate scientists — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — the reason behind this trend is global warming and CC due to human activity. Humans releasing heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is the basis of the warming trend.
Credit where credit is due. Sent April 6:
As your article makes clear, the warming atmosphere and the changing climate are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. But there is more to this than terminological niceties. The phrase “climate change” was first suggested in 2002, by Frank Luntz, a public relations specialist for the U.S. Republican Party, as a way of deflecting increasing public concern about “global warming.” The new words sounded less ominous, and therefore less likely to trigger demand for meaningful policy responses — anathema to the petrol-funded Bush administration.
In a rare turn of events, the term generated by a political consultant more accurately describes the situation, and is now routinely used by climatologists. But the grim irony of the situation is that Mr. Luntz’ strategic euphemism enabled the United States and its industrialized allies to postpone indefinitely the changes that must be made if our species and our civilization are to prosper in the coming centuries.
Warren Senders
atheism environment Politics: assholes denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 3, Day 28: Inhofe Is INHERENTLY Unconstitutional
The Bradenton Herald (FL) runs the same piece on Inhofe to which I responded yesterday.
The real hoax is the claim that a scientific debate exists about the reality of climate change. It is promoted by organizations that benefit from our current energy choices and groups that are opposed to any regulation whatsoever, even the most sensible safeguards that help protect our children’s health.
The hoaxers claim climate scientists are “in it for the money,” a ludicrous proposition as pointed out by Jon Koomey. Dr. Koomey used his expertise in mathematical modeling to study the economic impacts of climate change for two decades at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. If Koomey and his colleagues were in it for the money they would have taken their analytic expertise to Wall Street long ago, where their salaries would have been five to 10 times what they can make working for the government.
The hyped rhetoric around this issue is an attempt to convince Americans that accepting the scientific evidence will require taking actions inimical to our shared values of liberty, freedom, community and entrepreneurship.
But one need look no further than the studies of America’s military and intelligence officials who understand how disruptive human-caused climate change could be to our nation’s interests both at home and abroad (in 2009 the CIA established a Center on Climate Change and National Security). Putting our head in the sand about climate change is a sure way to undermine American liberty, economic prosperity and national security. Of all the alterative paths before us to address this problem, doing nothing to reduce the threat of serious climate change is a dangerous and expensive option.
There’s a climate change hoax all right, but it is Sen. Inhofe and his science-denying associates who are trying to do the fooling. We are all going to pay a price if we don’t call-out their campaign of misinformation and get down to the real work before us. The question now is what will be the cost of inaction to our health and our pocketbooks? The longer the hoaxers can prevent serious action, the higher the price we will all pay.
The guy is a disgrace to idiots everywhere. Sent March 22 (80 degrees outside):
Oklahoma senator James Inhofe is egregiously ignorant about basic science. His approach to climate change is equal parts stout denial and hippie-punching; apparently mocking environmentalists and rejecting the existence of the burgeoning crisis is enough to make the problem go away. Inhofe recently stated (on MSNBC) that he used to accept the conclusions of climatologists until he figured out how much it would cost to address the problem, demonstrating that the power of wishful thinking trumps reality every time — in the U.S. Senate, anyway.
Anywhere else? Ignoring your cardiologist’s warning doesn’t mean an automatic heart attack, and driving drunk doesn’t always mean a crash — but your insurance company and the arresting officer know: reality wins.
Mr. Inhofe’s thinking is so steeped in the apocalyptic wishful thinking of Biblical end-times theology that his involvement in climate policy should probably be forbidden under the Establishment clause of the Constitution.
Warren Senders
Politics: idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
On this date in 2003…
…we invaded Iraq.
“My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.”
—Dick Cheney (3/16/03)
Education environment Politics: assholes denialists Heartland Institute idiots Karl Rove reality-based community Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 2, Day 21: Post-Modernist Science Education: Applying the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis To Atmospheric Chemistry.
More on the Heartland Institute leak, from the New York Times:
Leaked documents suggest that an organization known for attacking climate science is planning a new push to undermine the teaching of global warming in public schools, the latest indication that climate change is becoming a part of the nation’s culture wars.
Related in OpinionThe documents, from a nonprofit organization in Chicago called the Heartland Institute, outline plans to promote a curriculum that would cast doubt on the scientific finding that fossil fuel emissions endanger the long-term welfare of the planet. “Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective,” one document said.
While the documents offer a rare glimpse of the internal thinking motivating the campaign against climate science, defenders of science education were preparing for battle even before the leak. Efforts to undermine climate-science instruction are beginning to spread across the country, they said, and they fear a long fight similar to that over the teaching of evolution in public schools.
You know what? I’m sick of people saying “alarmist” like it’s an insult. The news is pretty fucking alarming, all the damn time. If you’re not alarmed (hell, if you’re not absolutely terrified) you’re just not paying attention. Sorry to harsh your mellow, but that’s what’s happening.
Anyway, I like the phrase “nihilistic political solipsism.” Sent February 16:
In the helter-skelter 24-hour news cycle that shapes American politics, the words of officials from the previous administration might as well be written in hieroglyphics; the first decade of our century is already ancient history. But the recent leak of documents from the Heartland Institute describing their plans to foster climate-change denial in our nation’s classrooms call to mind Karl Rove’s comments to journalist Ron Suskind. Expressing contempt for the “reality-based community,” Rove went on to say, “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.”
But this is a dangerous game. Old-style Soviet historical revisionism is only effective when the facts are all in the past; the Heartland Institute is attempting to revise the future by applying their nihilistic political solipsism to actual real-world problems requiring reality-based solutions. The physics and chemistry of the greenhouse effect won’t be fooled by banners and photo ops.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: corporate irresponsibility denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 2, Day 17: Many Tables For One, In A Greek Restaurant
The Lehigh Valley Morning Call (PA) has a nice piece from a local allergist, discussing denialism in general in the context of a textbook dispute:
At a recent Saucon Valley School Board meeting, board member Bryan Eichfeld raised his concerns about a textbook proposed for the 2012-13 school year. The book was not a manual for teaching creationism in the classroom, nor was it a book espousing particular political beliefs. The textbook, “Globalization and Diversity,” simply spoke of the geopolitical, cultural and environmental impacts of — gasp — climate change.
Thankfully, the board overrode Eichfeld’s motion to reject the text, and for that it should be commended. However, the fact that this sort of science denialism is seeping into our schools and possibly hindering the education of our students is troublesome and deserves to be the topic of a healthy public discourse.
As an allergist in the Lehigh Valley, I have seen the health effects of a warmer climate — including an earlier and longer pollen season — firsthand. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the leading international network of climate scientists, first recognized the potential for climate change to impact asthma and allergic diseases in 2001, and I have been deeply concerned about the implications for my patients ever since.
The affects of global warming will extend well beyond my specialization, however, and the implications for everyone will be serious. Climate change will exacerbate extreme weather events, jeopardize the U.S. food supply and drastically alter the landscapes we call home. Educating the public on the science behind these risks and their consequences is the first step to confronting and mitigating this pressing issue.
I’m in kind of a hurry, so this was ideal for a generic “Republicans are idiots” screed. Sent Feb 12:
For more than fifty years, the Republican Party has waged a steady war on expertise and logic. Since the election of Ronald Reagan, the role of actual facts in GOP policy-making has steadily diminished. The eight years of the Bush administration showed us what happens when ideology trumps reality, and it’s not pretty. It will take decades to recover from the damage inflicted during that time.
Nowhere is this more problematic than in the public discussion over the issues of climate and energy, where a group of factually-challenged ideologues have hijacked the conversation. The Tea-Partiers have been cynically manipulated by (to resurrect Teddy Roosevelt’s phrase) “malefactors of great wealth.” Their denial of global climate change serves the temporary profits of a few, while delaying the long-term preparations necessary in the face of one of the greatest threats our species has yet confronted.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: denialists economics extinction idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 2, Day 15: Problems Of Scale, As Usual
The bigger the political system, the less competent it is to address the problem. The Albany Times-Union:
ALBANY — Seven “hundred-year floods” have hit the Catskills during the last 15 years, and lobsters have grown so scarce in Long Island Sound that lobstermen have given up trying to make a living there.
As a result, it’s time for the humans to start figuring out how to protect the trout, lobsters and countless other species being challenged by climate change.
That’s the problem state and federal environmental officials and scientists are grappling with in the middle of a winter that been virtually snowless in much of New York.
A group gathered at the state Department of Environmental Conservation headquarters Thursday to work on a plan for protecting plant and animal life in the decades to come.
While political pundits may still be debating global warming or the impact of greenhouse gases, a broad consensus of scientists have agreed the climate is changing.
Extinction is bad for the bottom line. Sent Feb 10:
It’s good news that state and local governments are taking action to mitigate the expected effects of climate change. But it is shocking that the federal government remains paralyzed by ideological squabbling in the face of what is arguably the greatest threat human civilization has yet faced. Did I say “squabbling?” Perhaps that’s the wrong word, since all the name-calling, vituperation, and misinformation are coming from one side of the political spectrum.
If Republicans and their financial backers were to consider the implications of climate research objectively, several things would happen. First, they’d stop denying the factuality of global climate chaos, and start working actively to slow it down and to cope with its impacts. Second, they would recognize that preserving the planetary systems on which our culture depends is as important for market capitalists as it is for radical “tree-huggers,” for a profitable economy requires environmental stability to flourish.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes hippie-punching idiots Republican obstructionism Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 2, Day 4: Nattering Nitwits of Know-Nothingism
The Daily Advertiser (Lafayette, LA) runs another in a series of rueful analyses from former Republicans who’ve broken with the batshit crazies now running their party:
The abuse directed at climate researchers sheds light on a tragic political truth — a cancer is consuming the soul of American conservatism. Conservatism is taking on many of the hallmarks of a cult — one in which information and doctrine are received, without question, from recognized authority figures or sources, and in which dissent cannot be tolerated. The conservative cult views the political process in apocalyptic terms, and sees its opponents as demonically evil. Sadly, climate denial is a key pillar in this cult’s ideology.
Under these circumstances, conservative scientists like Hayhoe and Emanuel are particularly dangerous. They demonstrate that there isn’t a fundamental incongruity between religious faith, or conservatism, and accepting the science behind AGW. They are heretics, calling to other conservatives from beyond the walls of the cult compound. And that’s a mortal threat to the climate deniers, and perhaps to the very existence of the cult itself.
In the end, the bullying and abuse of scientists is a sign of growing desperation. The cult must be defended, by any means. Dissenters must be intimidated into silence. With everything else against them, conservative climate deniers have only one option left – it’s time to get personal, and pound.
So the GOP’s full of crazy, huh? Gosh! Wouldn’t have expected that. Wonder why? Sent January 29:
Michael Stafford’s analysis of Republican cultishness (with particular reference to climate change denial) is exactly accurate. The exclusive reliance on received knowledge, the glib dismissal of ideologically inconvenient facts, the Manichaean mindset in which subtlety is inconceivable and compromise impossible — behold the public face of American conservatism today!
But how did the GOP turn into an apocalyptic, willfully ignorant mob? Mr. Stafford, a former party official, is readier to deplore his erstwhile compatriots’ behavior than to acknowledge the party’s complicity in its own degradation.
It’s undeniable: conservative politicians have long cultivated a virulent strain of electorally useful anti-intellectualism. Demagogues have been elected all over America by railing against “pointy-headed professors”, and “so-called experts.”
Who’d have thought that fifty years spent attacking intelligence, reason and scientific expertise would build an ignorant, unreasonable, and scientifically incompetent constituency? A few liberal intellectuals, perhaps — but their opinions didn’t count. Buncha damned hippies!
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes denialists idiots Republicans scientific method
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 1, Day 9: Morans.
The L.A. Times runs a story on the Pacific Institute’s “Bad Science” Award, which goes to a deserving cast of characters (Murdoch was runner-up, which will give you an idea):
The 2011 “Climate B.S. of the Year Award” goes to the entire field of candidates currently stumping in New Hampshire for the Republican Party presidential nomination, the Pacific Institute announced Thursday.
The awards, in their second year, are intended to distinguish the most active among so-called climate change deniers.
In this case, “B.S.” stands for bad science, according to hydroclimatologist Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute and a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
“There’s a lot of very serious pushback in the scientific community about bad climate science being pushed by a small group of skeptics,” said Gleick from his office in Oakland. “There’s plenty of formal pushback in the literature. This was an attempt, really, to highlight some of the most egregious examples over the past year in a way that was a little more lighthearted.”
The Republicans seeking the White House won this year’s contest “hands down,” the institute’s announcement says: “Not a single one of the Republican candidates for president has a position on climate change that is consistent with the actual science accepted by 97-98% of all climate scientists and every national academy of sciences on the planet.”
It gave me a chance to use the China Hands reference again. While this letter works fairly well I am not entirely pleased with it; it could be more euphonious if I had more time to devote to its creation. But it’s 149 words. What the hell. Sent January 5:
It is only in the past fifty years that the GOP has made a rejection of science a linchpin of its policies and electoral strategy. Capitalizing on a long-standing undercurrent of anti-intellectualism in American society, Republican politicians have long stigmatized professors, scientists and experts as “liberal elitists.” While they’ve won applause from constituents, these attacks ultimately redound to the detriment of the country as a whole.
The Republican party’s arrogant rejection of the crucial findings of climate scientists is of a piece with the McCarthy-era purge of “China hands” from the State Department, rendering America’s East Asian policy rudderless in the face of Ho Chi Minh’s Vietnamese nationalism. Ignoring the experts didn’t work out then, did it? It won’t work out well now, either, as GOP presidential aspirants eagerly dismiss scientists’ urgent warnings of runaway climate change. Ignorance may be politically blissful, but it always makes for bad policy.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes climate science denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 1, Day 4: Nattering Nabobs? Pointy-Headed Professors? Experts? We Don’t Need No Steeeeeenkin’ Experts!
The NYT has a year’s-end editorial noting the GOP’s reality problem:
Is there a connection between last year’s extreme weather events and global warming? The answers might be a lot clearer if the Republicans in Congress were less hostile to climate change research.
A typical year in the United States features three or four weather disasters costing more than $1 billion. In 2009 there were nine. Last year brought a dozen, at a cost of $52 billion, making it the most extreme year for weather since accurate record keeping began in the 19th century. There was drought in the Southwest while Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee destroyed homes and rerouted rivers in the Northeast. The most severe tornado ever recorded, and the most tornadoes recorded in a single month, flailed the Southeast. Floods drowned the Midwest.
Climate researchers have been cautious about linking individual events to rising global temperatures. Yet the evidence tells us the earth is warming, largely as a result of the burning of fossil fuels and other human activity. And many of last year’s extreme weather events were consistent with the effects of climate change. A warming atmosphere will hold more water, supplying the fuel for storms; steadily rising temperatures are likely to promote droughts. Climate is a complex subject, and definitive answers will require more study. But as Justin Gillis recently noted in The Times, the political climate for that is not favorable. House Republicans, many of whom reject the scientific consensus about the human causes of global warming, took aim at almost every program that had to do with global warming. Senate negotiators managed to protect most in the 2012 budget, but the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — the hub of much of the government’s research into the effects of climate change on weather — took a big hit.
If we can’t disprove the evidence, let’s attack the experts! This letter is the first time I’ve specifically linked the China purges to climate denial, which I think is rather clever. Sent December 31:
Just as it’s impossible to link individual weather events to global climate change, we cannot establish direct connections between specific conservative denials of factual evidence and the GOP’s multi-decade crusade against science education. This reluctance to make promiscuous causal links is a feature of rational thought.
Irrational thought, by contrast, finds its political expression in Reaganesque government-by-anecdote, in pandering to religious zealotry, and in the dismissal of expertise as “elitist” (their desperate rejection of climate science has parallels throughout the GOP’s history, as witness the McCarthy-era purges of China experts from the State Department).
Just as climatologists have predicted for years that the world’s climate will be gravely affected by an escalating greenhouse effect, sociologists and political scientists have long suggested that increasing irrationality in American education, media and public discourse will ultimately destroy the Jeffersonian ideal of a “well-educated citizenry.” Unsurprisingly, those elitist experts have been proved correct. Again.
Warren Senders