Global Warming Denial
Fatalistic Friday: Americans still confused about global warming
Published July 10, 2009 @ 01:43PM PT
A recipe for climate disruption:
- Take the American public
- Add 10-plus years of slick global warming disinformation campaigns aimed at both pubilc and journalists
- Season with gaps in science education
Stir vigorously to blend.
The result: A populace that -- at the same time it's burning enormous quantities of oil and coal, which produces most of the excess heat-trapping greenhouse gas pollution in the atmosphere -- remains uncertain, doubtful, and sometimes significantly misinformed when it comes to both the science and the reality of global warming.
Serves one planet, badly.
There's apparently a huge gap between what scientists understand about human-propelled global warming, and what the public understands. According to the latest Pew Research Center science survey (done jointly with the American Association for the Advancement of Science), 35% of the public believes that "scientists do not generally agree" that the earth is getting warmer because of human activity. That is, just over a third of adult Americans believe there is still significant disagreement among scientists about the extent of human-propelled global warming. (This number is up from 29% in Pew's 2006 survey.)
However, Pew found that among scientists, 84% agree that human activities, such as burning fossil fuels, are primarily what's causing the Earth's surface temperature to rise. Put another way, with more than 8 in 10 scientists agreeing on both the reality and the causes of climate change, there is no longer "significant disagreement" in the field.
However, just 49% of the public agree that human activities are changing the climate.
These findings demonstrate just how big a challenge sits before political leaders, journalists, scientists, educators, and fellow citizens to educate the public, and get effective clean energy and climate policies enacted in the US.
The survey reveals some upbeat trends as well: Pew found that the public holds scientists in high esteem. "84% of Americans agree that science is having a mostly positive effect on society, and that this belief holds strong across every major demographic category, including 88% of Republicans and 83% of Evangelicals," writes "Framing Science" blogger Matthew Nisbett in his excellent summary of this portion of the survey.
"When asked to evaluate various professions, roughly 70% of Americans answer that scientists 'contribute a lot' to society compared to 38% for journalists, 23% for lawyers, 40% for clergy, and 21% for business executives. Only members of the military (84%) and teachers (77%) rate higher in public admiration and esteem," Nisbett writes.
This suggests that if and as scientists comment publicly on the reality of global warming, what's causing it, and how to slow it down, a plurality of Americans will believe them.
That leaves it up to my reviled profession to do more fair and accurate reporting on these issues, too.
Inhofe Watch: Senator Demands Investigation of EPA Non-Scandal
Published July 07, 2009 @ 04:31PM PT
Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) has called for a criminal investigation into charges that the Environmental Protection Agency squelched employees who disagreed with its endangerment finding: that human-caused carbon dioxide as the primary cause of climate change.
Sen. Inhofe, a long-time denier of human-propelled climate change, told Fox News last week that under the Obama administration,
[EPA officials] have been suppressing science and coming out with what they want people to say. You might remember — I talked to you about it on this station. When I first realized that this thing was a hoax and I made the statement that the notion that man-made gases, anthropogenic gases, CO2 cause global warming, it is probably the greatest hoax ever perpetrated.
As I noted in a post earlier today, about Senator John Barrasso (R-Wy.)'s similar performance at this morning's hearing of the Environment and Public Works Committee, this strikes me as a weird case of transference; since, under the Bush administration, global warming science demonstrably was suppressed, and scientists squelched, and these senators stood by and watched.
The work they are championing, by economists Alan Carlin and John Davidson of EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics, has not withstood scientific scrutiny. NASA climatologist Gavin Schmidt describes it as "a ragbag collection of un-peer reviewed web pages, an unhealthy dose of sunstroke, a dash of astrology and more cherries than you can poke a cocktail stick at." Carlin was allowed to submit it for inclusion in the endangerment finding, and EPA rejected it on its scientific merits.
Unfortunately, a couple traditional news outlets that ought to know better, CBS News and The New York Times, fell back on old habits of "he said, she said" style global warming reporting. Each has devoted some space to this story, while failing to question the motivations of the Competitive Enterprise Institute in trying to whip up some controversy around the Carlin/Davidson document. CEI is a free-market advocacy think tank that's long opposed curbing greenhouse gas pollution and disputed the reality of global warming.
If Sens. Inhofe and Barrasso had their way, we would soon see thousands millions of taxpayer dollars devoted to an investigation into why bad science was not included in an EPA decision.
Think of all that money going into clean tech research and development, instead!
Boxer, Jackson Blast Sen. Barrasso's "Suppressed EPA Memo" Meme
Published July 07, 2009 @ 10:57AM PT
Did you hear the one about how the Obama administration is fostering a "culture of secrecy and suppression" of science?
That was the claim made by Senator John Barrasso (R-Wy.). At this morning's hearing of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. Barrasso spent most of his time projecting onto the Obama administration a phenomenon he didn't seem to mind when it was actually practiced by the Bush-Cheney administration: censorship of scientific data on climate change, and suppression of the words and works of federal employees.
While Democratic and some of his GOP colleagues spent the morning discussing how to take action on clean energy and global warming with four members of the Obama cabinet, Sen. Barrasso tried to hamstring the hearing. He charged that an EPA economist was squelched from above when he disagreed with the agency's endangerment finding on carbon dioxide.
"What I've seen so far is an administration that is saying, yes we can hide the truth, yes we can hide the facts, and yes we can intimidate career government employees," said Sen. Barrasso.
Calling the accusation of censoring science "a brutal charge to levy," Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the committee chair, addressed it to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson.
"I will be brief, because I think this committee has more important and substantive issues to deal with," said Ms. Jackson.
Citing materials released by the free-market advocacy think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute, including an exchange of emails between the EPA staffer at the creamy center of this story and his managers, Jackson stated that the "facts do not justify the CEI release."
The EPA employee, economist Alan Carlin, was given permission and encouraged to speak his mind, and find peer-reviewed work to back up his disagreement to the EPA's finding, she said. "I personally instructed staff that Carlin should feel free to circulate [his] memo to anyone he wished," Jackson said, adding, "I don't believe process debates like this are serving the American people" by finding solutions to clean energy generation and ways to stop global warming.
As Grist reporter Jonathan Hiskes has written, there's nothing to speak of to this conspiracy allegation by Sen. Barrasso and others on the right. "EPA Press Secretary Adora Andy noted that Carlin’s education and work expertise are largely in economics, not climatology," says Hiskes. "That’s why his comments on climate science were not included" in the endangerment finding.
Carlin's own report does not back up CEI's allegations, says Hiskes, and recycles several well-debunked global warming hoaxes: that the science is so rapidly evolving that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's reports cannot be trusted; that the globe is really cooling; that the mass of Greenland's ice cap is stable; and others.
The science in the document doesn't hold up. NASA climatologist Gavin Schmidt wrote on RealClimate (and Hiskes reposted to Grist, as I'm reposting here):
...what solid peer reviewed science do they cite for support? A heavily-criticised blog posting showing that there are bi-decadal periods in climate data and that this proves it was the sun wot done it. The work of an award-winning astrologer (one Theodor Landscheidt, who also thought that the rise of Hitler and Stalin were due to cosmic cycles), a classic Courtillot paper we've discussed before, the aforementioned FoS web page, another web page run by Doug Hoyt, a paper by Garth Paltridge reporting on artifacts in the NCEP reanalysis of water vapour that are in contradiction to every other reanalysis, direct observations and satellite data, a complete reprint of another un-peer reviewed paper by William Gray, a nonsense paper by Miskolczi etc. etc.
I'm not quite sure how this is supposed to compete with the four rounds of international scientific and governmental review of the IPCC or the rounds of review of the CCSP reports ...
...Finally, they end up with the oddest claim in the submission: That because human welfare has increased over the twentieth century at a time when CO2 was increasing, this somehow implies that no amount of CO2 increases can ever cause a danger to human society. This is just boneheadly stupid.
So in summary, what we have is a ragbag collection of un-peer reviewed web pages, an unhealthy dose of sunstroke, a dash of astrology and more cherries than you can poke a cocktail stick at. Seriously, if that's the best they can do, the EPA's ruling is on pretty safe ground.
There are many really substantive critiques to make of the House clean energy and climate legislation, and whatever version the Senate will eventually take up. These policies warrant serious discussion and consideration in Congress.
Instead, Sen. Barrasso is falling down on the job. He is using falsehoods to try and block much-needed debates of and advancements on energy and climate policy, instead of engaging on the real issues. It's a mystery why his constituents don't demand better.
From Stephen Colbert to Steve Doocy: 7 Videos to Watch This Week
Published July 01, 2009 @ 05:55PM PT
1. The Colbert Report, May 7, 2009: Smokin' Pole - The Fight for Arctic Riches
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Smokin' Pole - The Fight for Arctic Riches | ||||
|
||||
Arctic nations rush to stake claims in polar territories, even though it clearly belongs to America -- Superman lives there.
2. Al Gore warns on latest climate trends
Al Gore presents updated slides from around the globe to make the case that worrying climate trends are even worse than scientists predicted, and to make clear his stance on "clean coal."
3. Bill McKibben: Fighting Climate Change in the Obama Era
Greenpeace UK has a chat over coffee with veteran US "environmental guru" Bill McKibben. McKibben has been agitating and organising to make governments take strong action on climate change for the past 20 years. Until there is a mass movement that both gives politicians the space to act, he believes, and forces them to do so, change will be halting.
4. Ray Zahab treks to the South Pole
Extreme runner Ray Zahab shares an enthusiastic account of his record-breaking trek on foot to the South Pole in January 2009 -- a 33-day sprint through the snow. Zahab broke the record for fastest unsupported trek across Antarctica, to raise awareness and money for kids' environmental education.
5. The American Denial of Global Warming
Why do some Americans still believe that there is "no solid" evidence of global warming, or that if warming is happening it can be attributed to natural variability? Or that scientists are still debating the point? Scientist and renowned historian Naomi Oreskes describes her investigation into the reasons for such widespread mistrust and misunderstanding of scientific consensus and probes the history of organized campaigns designed to create public doubt and confusion about science. Via University of California
Television
6. The Daily Show, June 1, 2009: Bob Woodruff chats with Jon Stewart about global warming
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Bob Woodruff | ||||
|
||||
Experts say over the next hundred years the "perfect storm" of population growth, resource depletion and climate change could converge with catastrophic results. On the eve of the broadcast of ABC's "Earth 2100" special, Bob Woodruff lays out the worst-case scenario for the future of civilization, and how we can act now to set a different course.
7. Fox News reports global temperature decline falsehood as if it's true
Several Fox News figures have used a purportedly "suppressed" EPA document to advance the falsehood that, in Steve Doocy's words, "for the last 11 years, temperatures had been dropping." More at Media Matters for America.
Rep. Doggett on Why He'll Vote Yes for Clean Energy-Climate Bill
Published June 26, 2009 @ 03:43PM PT
In a nutshell, because he's disgusted at how fellow GOPers Texans and representatives have joined the "Flat Earth Society," are denying the reality of global warming.
UPDATE: Mr. Doggett's party affiliation is in fact Democratic. Apologies for the error.
Olbermann: "Newt Gingrich, in the pocket of Big Coal"
Published June 24, 2009 @ 12:00PM PT
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
An advocacy group run by one-time GOP influencer Newt Gingrich has been running ads against the Waxman-Market clean energy and climate bill. Problem is, that group got a quarter of a million dollars last year from coal giant Peabody Energy.
Keith Olbermann nominates Gingrich as one of his "Worst Persons in the World" for June 23, 2009.
[[Some people pillory Al Gore for earning money from investments in clean energy and climate change mitigation even as he advocates for strong GHG caps. If the point is *really* conflict of interest, not opposing climate action, it would be refreshing if they'd skewer Gingrich as well, for speaking out against the Waxman-Markey bill, while profiting from contributions by coal, oil and utility majors to his 527 group.]]
Here's Mr. Gingrich all of 14 months ago, calling for immediate climate action:
[[The Catholic Church opposes the right to choose abortion, but it also opposes the death penalty. That's a consistent stand on "the culture of life," at least.]]
Best of the Blogs: Daryl Hannah and some NASA guy arrested at anti-coal protest
Published June 24, 2009 @ 09:59AM PT
Above: Video of yesterday's arrests at Coal River, via Rainforest Action Network's Understory blog
Today's random installment of Best of the Blogs features a number of news items that represent our sorry political progress, nationally and worldwide, on stopping global warming. It's astonishing, however believable, that this is the political status quo on climate change one decade into the 21st century:
Major Concession to Ag Industry in Clean Energy-Climate Bill (Stop Global Warming) [[Yes, my own post from last night]]
NASA Climate scientist James Hansen, celebri-green Daryl Hannah, others, arrested in Coal Country protest:
- Hansen of NASA Arrested in Coal Country (DotEarth - The New York Times)
- Live at Coal River—mass arrests against mountaintop removal (Grist)
A warning from Copenhagen: Earth's surface heating faster than expected, and we're not doing near enough to stop it (Real Climate)
Senate Panel Trims Interior-Epa Budget From House Levels (Greenwire) [[Cutting the budgets for these agencies just as we need to get real about saving forests, regulating carbon? Yup. Not a blog, but I cannot find coverage anywhere else so far]]
A few takes on Russia's climate blindness:
- Russia’s Do-nothing Climate Plan (Environmental Capital - The Wall Street Journal)
- Russia: Carbon dioxide emissions up 30% till 2020 (Global Voices Online)
- Russia to be Particularly Screwed by Climate Change (Treehugger)
Shame on the New York Times for running ExxonMobil’s greenwashing ad once again — they can’t plead ignorance this time, only greed (the ever-verbose Climate Progress)
Supreme Court Clears Way for Mining Company to Destroy Alaskan Lake (Climate of Our Future) [[An eternity's wilderness lost for a moment's energy mined]]
