Let's Debate as Equals?

Today a piece appeared in the Bee by the Washington Post "Climate Change Added to Politics of Culture War". It adds to my alarm that people are not taking man made climate change seriously.

The radical right has been working overtime, aided by big oil dollars, to blunt the urgency of climate change warnings. At first, a concerted effort was made to discredit the scientific research. For example, some emails were captured that allegedly showed the whole threat was a fraud.

Once these emails were actually read, no evidence of fraud concerning climate change was found. But, deniers continue to point to the "climate-gate" to discredit scientific climate change research.

Now, the deniers are working overtime to convince their "followers" that climate change is part of the "debate" between conservatives and liberals; and "both sides are too extreme are are wrong".

The article supports this point of view: that climate change is a "political debate", with exaggerations on both sides.

And we hear this echoed everyday in the denier world. Climate change concern is depicted as a veiled effort to grow the size of government, and that is all it is, there is no real threat..it is all made up!

The article depicted climate science, that provides a crushing amount of data to support the FACT of manmade global warming on equal balance with denier speculation that global warming is a natural thing.

The deniers, who are almost always backed by the worst polluters, said the same thing about DDT, acid rain, and the health disaster of tobacco. They ignore the actual facts, found a tangental sliver of argument, and made it the main argument.

For example, tobacco companies never talked about the proof that smoking causes cancer and heart disease, but cooked up the argument about second hand smoke, diverting the public's concern from death to the inconvenience of being exposed to second hand smoke. They fought the evidence that second hand smoke causes the same health problems of first hand smoke, and for years we argued over that, ignoring the millions dying around us. This bought time, continued profits, and killed millions.

They are doing it again. They want us to debate if global warming is man-made rather than pay attention to the effects of CO2 increases on the climate. They seek to politicize the issue, make it part of the clash of political philosophies, rather than admit to hard scientific research.

So Lindbaugh takes it up as yet another example of the progressive elite trying to "take away your rights, and freedoms." Or, incredibly agreeing there is global warming, but it is not man made, and no evidence exists that there is.

So we debate whether climate change, that is killing more every year, and reaching critical levels, is caused by man or not. This flies in face of overwhelming evidence that global warming is man made. But, this is never good enough for the cons. Meanwhile we are diverted from the actual damage caused by global warming everyday, while we debate nuances.

These are classis public relations ploys. They are purposeful diverting attention from the real threats and scientific predictions, just like the tobacco industry did.

If you look at the Health Insurace Industry's efforts to discredit any reform or regulation, you see the same thing. They NEVER defend their constant raises in premiums, which are at the core of the problem, they defend their opposition to "death panels"; that never have been an real issue or threat.

But, if you ask conservatives about their concerns with the Affordable Health Care Act, they immediately say "Death Panels".

In short, public relations experts are working overtime to confuse, to blunt, to discredit climate science that shows clearly a catastrophic threat exists caused by human beings.

And now, a columnist for the Washington Post has been also taken into by this con job.

A long time ago, people figured out how to fool the public. There are college majors that teach people how to do it; it is called public relations advertising. These people are very good at what they do. The techniques are too many to discuss here. Just think about advertising and all the tricks used, then assume climate change deniers are doing the same thing. Do you believe the ads you see on T.V.?

Of course not. Then apply the same common sense to the denier's arguments. Apply the same common sense to the scientific evidence, then decide what to believe.

Oh, I am sure you are saying that climate change advocates also can use P.R. to build their case. If that is true, then show me the money. Show me what vested interest has a stake in convincing the world of climate change and the need to do something about it. That would be a large vested commercial interest.

You can't find one on anywhere near the scale of big oil. If you are saying the progressives, then what commerical interest is behind them? What commerical interest is served by predicting global catastrophe?

There is none.

What threatens the denier interests are people who read, who go to the research, and refuse to be conned. That is why they attack the educated "elites" so much; because they see through their lies and con job. Since when, by the way, do we follow stupid people over the educated?

Unfortunately, educated skeptics are an increasing minority in this country.

They are lying to you! They are winning! And our grandchildren will suffer the consequences!