Slate
BAD ASTRONOMY
THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE IN BLOG FORM
|
Posted
Friday, May 24, 2013, at 9:33 AM
A lot of news has bubbled up about global warming over the past few
days, and devoting a post to each one would be a) carpal tunnel
syndrome-inducing, and 2) depressing as hell. So in the manner of
ripping off a Band-aid quickly, here is a torrent of global warming
info, and as usual it’s about reality and the foes thereof.
1) Consensus
First up: A clarification.
I recently posted
that 97% of global warming papers that take a stance on its cause say
it’s human-induced. This has generated the usual amount of hot air (ha!
haha!) from the deniers, including the gem that consensus doesn’t equal
reality. “Scientists once thought the Earth was flat!” they cry.
That’s actually not quite true; ancient Greek scientists knew the Earth was round, and
even how big it was. And who do you think replaces older, less accurate information with better understanding?
Scientists!
Anyway, we on the side of reality know that consensus is not proof of
global warming—the scientific evidence of global warming is
overwhelming and obvious, as well as
very easy to find. The actual point of discussing the consensus is that due to the relentless effort of deniers,
the public thinks this is a real controversy.
It isn’t. The consensus shows that the vast majority of actual climate scientists agree that global warming is real, and we’re to blame.
Which brings me to this head-desking bit of denial:
2) Lamar Smith’s Embarrassing Editorial
Representative Lamar Smith (R-Tex) is head of the House Science Committee, and also a major global warming denier.
He wrote an OpEd in the Washington Post recently that is a atrocious bit of nonsense typical of the genre.
Some members of Congress love to blow smoke.
Photo by krossbow on Flickr, modified by Phil Plait
Smith’s false claims are ably dismantled at
Climate Science Watch, which has links and references. Smith is an interesting case:
he’s also trying mightily to politicize the National Science Foundation,
but at the same time is a strong advocate for NASA and space
exploration, and other fields of science as well. This makes him less of
a caricature than, say, Georgia Representative
Paul “Evolution is a lie from the pit of Hell” Broun,
but serves as a good example that ideological compartmentalization
affects all of us, and we all suffer from cognitive biases. We need to
be aware of them, and we especially need to be aware of them—and call
them out—when our duly elected representatives display them.
Speaking of which…
3) Why Deny?
It’s not clear to me why some people deny the fact of global warming.
It may be ideological, or it may be due to funding sources (like huge
amounts of cash dumped into denial by fossil fuel companies and
the Koch brothers).
Or it may be both. On MSNBC,
Chris Hayes has a pretty scathing expose on this, saying we need to follow the money, and also trace the religious belief used to bolster denialism. That last part is no joke;
a recent study showed that a chunk of people really believe in Biblical end times, and this colors their attitude about such things as climate change. Remember, in 2009,
Representative John Shimkus (R-Ill.) quoted the Bible in Congress—specifically
commenting on climate change—saying that only God can declare the time
when the Earth ends, and that “man will not destroy this Earth.”
And he still sits on the Committee for Energy and Commerce.
So, yeah.
4) Big Picture Science
I did an interview with my friend and astronomer Seth Shostak on the SETI radio show
Big Picture Science, talking about
the awesomely terrible claim that more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is great for plants. That whole show is about global warming, and it’s well worth your time to hear.
5) What Say Ye?
So what do you do when confronted by a denier, who says CO2 is good for us, or that ice is increasing, or that the Sun is the cause of warming?
What you do is refer to
this fantastic list of 99 one-liners rebutting denier claims.
It’s one-stop shopping for quick retorts to these talking points. It’s
lengthy, but good, and has links to more detailed rebuttals and science
as well.
And you should always have
Skeptical Science on your bookmarks. It’s one of the first places I go when I see some new climate antiscience that pops up in the deniosphere.
No comments:
Post a Comment