In May 2012, the New York Times published an article by Justin
Gillis titled, “Clouds’
Effect on Climate Change Is Last Bastion for Dissenters.” This article lends
legitimacy to the climate deniers subterfuge by unwittingly casting doubt.The article seems to infer that if you cannot predict with certainty the way clouds
will behave you cannot predict that the earth will keep warming. The article explains that scientists cannot predict future temperature, so
the inference is that we cannot predict global warming. “The result is a big
spread in forecasts of future temperature, one that scientists have not been
able to narrow much in 30 years of effort.”
Gillis titled, “Clouds’
Effect on Climate Change Is Last Bastion for Dissenters.” This article lends
legitimacy to the climate deniers subterfuge by unwittingly casting doubt.The article seems to infer that if you cannot predict with certainty the way clouds
will behave you cannot predict that the earth will keep warming. The article explains that scientists cannot predict future temperature, so
the inference is that we cannot predict global warming. “The result is a big
spread in forecasts of future temperature, one that scientists have not been
able to narrow much in 30 years of effort.”
Deniers whose views are shaped by reason and science acknowledge that the
Earth is warming and the climate is changing. These literate deniers have adopted a
new strategy focused on the unpredictability of clouds and the mistaken believe that although the planet
is warming it will not be catastrophic.
Earth is warming and the climate is changing. These literate deniers have adopted a
new strategy focused on the unpredictability of clouds and the mistaken believe that although the planet
is warming it will not be catastrophic.
There are already climate induced catastrophes taking place all around the world. Apparently deniers do not believe that deadly extreme weather or mass
starvation due to drought is catastrophic.
starvation due to drought is catastrophic.
Dr. Richard Lindzen is a climate denier from MIT, he also gave the Heartland 2010 keynote address. Lindzen thinks we should not
invest in emissions reduction, “If I’m right, we’ll have saved money” by
avoiding measures to limit emissions, Dr. Lindzen said in the New York
Times interview. “If I’m wrong, we’ll know it in 50 years and can do
something.” If only we had that much time.
invest in emissions reduction, “If I’m right, we’ll have saved money” by
avoiding measures to limit emissions, Dr. Lindzen said in the New York
Times interview. “If I’m wrong, we’ll know it in 50 years and can do
something.” If only we had that much time.
Inevitably, even the deniers will be
forced to acknowledge the catastrophic effects of climate change just as they
are being forced to accept that the Earth is warming. In the interim, these slow
learners cannot be allowed to impede progress towards a more environmentally
sustainable world.
forced to acknowledge the catastrophic effects of climate change just as they
are being forced to accept that the Earth is warming. In the interim, these slow
learners cannot be allowed to impede progress towards a more environmentally
sustainable world.
© 2012, Richard Matthews. All rights
reserved.
reserved.
Related Posts
Right Wing War Against Sustainability
The Business of Climate Change Deception
Foster Friess is the Climate Denying Money-Man
Republican’s Anti-Science Stance on Climate Change
The Koch Brother’s Ties to GOP
A Reintroduction to the Climate Denying Duo Known as the Koch Brothers
The Kochs’ War Against Obama and the Democrats
Koch Industries Financing Climate Denial
The Kochs’ Cato Institute’s Climate
Protecting the Planet from Corporate Misrepresentation
The Foxes in the Henhouse: Republicans in Charge of Climate and Energy Committees
What is Wrong with the Right
The Politics of Intransigence
