The 'two sides' of the climate debate

One of them is missing

Posted by David Roberts at 4:12 PM on 05 Feb 2007

Bad Actors and their enablers have been pushing a particular spin on the climate debate: it has "two sides," the denialists and the alarmists. What can wise people ~~above it all~~ in the center do but roll their eyes at the grubbiness of it all?

I'd like to introduce you to one side of the debate:

Only 13 percent of congressional Republicans say they believe that human activity is causing global warming, compared to 95 percent of congressional Democrats. Moreover, the number of Republicans who believe in human-induced global warming has actually dropped since April 2006, when the number was 23 percent.

OK, there are the denialists: 87% of the Republican leadership.

Now, where are those alarmists? As the "other side" of the debate, we could expect about 87% of the Democratic leadership to answer to that description, right?

But we survey the Democrats and find a patchwork of apathy and equivocation. We find endless hearings and tepid cap-and-trade proposals. Only two bills -- Waxman's Safe Climate Act in the House, Sanders' Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act in the Senate -- even pretend to target the 80% emissions reductions by 2050 scientists say will be needed to avoid irreparable damage. Suffice to say, those bills -- the closest thing on offer to alarmism -- are not supported by 87% of Congressional Democrats.

So if the alarmists are not in Congress, where are they? Where's this other side we always hear about? Al Gore? James Hansen? The director of Day After Tomorrow? That one college kid at that one rally that one time?

Even accepting what is absurd -- that these so-called alarmists commit an error equivalent to denying anthropogenic climate change altogether -- how can this motley Band of the Shrill be said to balance a debate against 87% of the Republican leadership?

Perhaps the fact that one of America's two political parties is led almost entirely by ignoramuses poses a somewhat larger barrier to commonsense climate policy than, say, the indelicacy of Al Gore's remarks on hurricanes.

For story: The 'two sides' of the climate debate
6 Comments | Post a Comment

Clang, clang, clang! Irreparable damage alert!

"...even pretend to target the 80% emissions reductions by 2050 scientists say will be needed to avoid irreparable damage."

And you wonder where the alarmists are?

Mark Bahner

by markbahner at 6:43 PM on 05 Feb 2007

Here

I'm an alarmist. Exponential melting of ice caps, glaciers, methane hydrate sea floor ice, and tundra ice entrapping methane.

There's your alarm, that's an alarm.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

by amazingdrx at 11:03 PM on 05 Feb 2007

Denial

The USA is in denial, because y'all live in the Northern Hemisphere, and your turn to really bake has yet to come. The north has a very large land mass compared to the south, but the ice in your half is melting faster..... all it all when y'all really realise what is happening, your lot will be a pillar of ice ! The coming Ice Age will bury all of the USA..... eventually

So denial is backed by your surroundings, you don't see really pressing problems (except productivity loss).... until you all freeze solid.

Y'all do not care what happens to the Southern Hemisphere, you don't live there, let alone know where it is.

And the greenhouse gas science presented to the public is just total Big Oil fabrication, and many people intuitively know this.

So no wonder confusion is the order of the day.

by Zarkov at 12:38 AM on 06 Feb 2007

One enabler given the cold shoulder

It looks like Republican fave Roger Pielke Jr. will not be testifying this Thursday. The Republicans extended the invitation and then took it back.

Oddly enough, the four people who will testify are all -- gasp! -- REAL scientists. What a novel idea. Not just professors who play scientist on their blogs. But actual people with stature and peer-reviewed publications.

http://science.house.gov/publications/hearings_markups_de ...

Still, the House Science Committee hasn't yet removed Pielke from the invite list.

Benny Big Eye

by Benny Big Eye at 6:47 AM on 06 Feb 2007

It's really up to all of us

It can be discouraging to hear politicians of all stripes continue to deny humanity's role in creating the climate crisis that we are facing. But you know what? Politicians generally only "get it" when they realize that public support for a political solution is overwhelming. It's often the only way to overcome the influence of big-money interests that continue to hold sway over both major parties.

We are experiencing a surge of grassroots activity in response to climate change in cities throughout America. We can all play a role in this effort by reducing the greenhouse gases for which we are individually responsible and urging our cities, workplaces, schools, and religious institutions to do the same. If we do (and is there any doubt that we must?), the politicians will follow. They always do.

Tom Kelly

by kyotousa at 11:19 AM on 06 Feb 2007

Go for it, NOW

>> We are experiencing a surge of grassroots activity >>

The voice crying out must be coherent, must shout the correct reasons, and then other sheep will bleat along
and maybe some action will be brought about.

I doubt there is enough time for this world to play these games.

Money and lifestyle has blinded almost everyone, even the convinced.

LOL

by Zarkov at 2:08 PM on 06 Feb 2007

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.