Interesting reaction to Thomas Friedman's article on "Global Weirding" in today's NY Times. He lays out an argument for getting climate scientists together and coming up with a clear joint statement on what is know about climate change (he admits that calling it global warming sets of the denialists whenever a snowstorm happens). His belief, as expressed in the article, is that if people just looked at the undisputed facts (of which there are many) they would realize that deniers are motivated to attack global climate change as unproved in order to protect their economic interests, and that the denial has nothing to do with science.
So people started commenting on the NY Times article. One of the comments (which attracted lots of recommendations) was to the effect that "Friedman - you are crazy to think that people will listen to reason - after all, a majority of Americans think (wrongly) that Saddam Hussien was involved in the 9/11 attacks, and 75% of Republicans believe Obama isn't American." While I don't know if her percentages are right, it certainly is true that many people hold onto patently false beliefs... for reasons I cannot comprehend. as another commenter notes, a large percentage of people don't even believe in evolution (which even the Catholic Church accepts as accurate)
A sample comment: "Sorry Tom, the fact of this matter are that no argument, no evidence, no persuasion will convince the folks tilted against the climate change (Global Warming) issue. They issue ridiculous statements and seemingly logical arguments against this issue and no evidence, no statement by experts will dislodge their stance. Those opposed to taking any action to moderate climate change are similar in mindset to the Creationist claiming fossils were placed on earth by the Devil to confuse mankind. This is a hopeless situation and as long as the United States is ruled by politicians willing to promulgate these arguments, to confuse voters, in support of their corporate bosses, we are lost."
So it seems we go down our separate paths - those who look at science - a process based on evidence, a self-correcting process, and those who look elsewhere - though for the life of me I cannot understand where they look, as it seems part denial of reality, part not wanting to face anything uncomfortable, and part not wanting to give up privilege that makes others pay for our extravagantly wasteful lifestyle.
When I first posted on Winnipesaukee.com I did not believe there were people who would admit to being climate deniers - those who would not accept the scientific evidence but instead refer to anecdotes (like "DC got a lot of snow - that means no global warming") or industry speaking pints that are not based on real evidence. I have learned a lot. I'm still amazed that people admit to rejecting science - its a sad comment on our country when science is denied and financial interests prevail. I have heard some posters say the issue of climate change/global warming is not settled science, and I appreciate skepticism (which is different than the more common extremist views regularly voiced here), but skepticism has to at least address the vast preponderance of evidence supporting global warming theories, and do something other than scream "its cold right here right now" to disprove global warming.
|