So, first off I get ready to insult a few people! However, if you're actually reading this, it means either you've already been insulted by the headline, or you're likely a liberal and reading this post will just reaffirm your beliefs. (Usually I like to keep beliefs out of climate science, but since beliefs are mostly what prevents the public from accepting climate science, we will be talking about beliefs. It's rather like Bones' dislike of physchology on the popular TV show Bones.)
So, why are Republicans more likely to think climate science is quackery and several thousand respected scientists have been paid off by some socialistic scheme to control the entire planet? I believe that issue is extremely complicated, and involves many variables, such as peer pressure and ideology identification, to name a few. These terms refer to the fact that people are inclined to believe in a set standard of beliefs and morals that match with the people and ideologies that they associate with. In other words, if you're a conservative listening to Rush Limbaugh, every time he jokes that hybrid drivers are "morally superior financially illiterate hippies," or some such, it reaffirms the ideology set that you've associated with, whether or not you actually think that hybrid drivers fall into that category.
So, doesn't everyone have certain disagreements with the people that they hang out with? Maybe - but only about 53% of the public believe that scientists agree on climate change. The reality is that 97% of climatologists agree that the data confirms that climate change is a reality. Notice that I did not saw they "believe" it is happening. This is not a matter of beliefs; believing climate change is not an issue is essentially like believing the earth is flat; it really doesn't matter what you believe, because it's there. However, due to propaganda and such, likely on part of the oil industry, the public and politicians have turned the issue into a political issue.
This is understandable, in a way. Since it will involve policy changes and decisions, it automatically becomes a political issue as soon as scientists suggest that we attempt to make changes. Thus, people then hear from the politicians - who freely admit that they are not scientists, which somehow excuses them from not understanding basic scientific principles. Senator Inhofe throwing a snowball in the Senate is a prime example of scientific ignorance and a poor understanding of the issues. A blizzard, even across the whole US, does not negate climate change, because not only must we think globally, we must think of the whole earth - because data has now shown that the oceans are likely to be responsible for absorbing the bulk of the heat from climate change. [1]
The recent temperature slowdown is proof of at least two things. 1. It shows that scientists are not fudging data, which is a rather absurd belief to begin with, since they would likely just continue to increase their numbers, and 2. There are still a lot of things we don't understand. This is something scientists are willing to admit - unlike many politicians and citizens.
This is also understandable. People do not like being told they are wrong. It rubs them the wrong way, damages their ego, and causes them to second guess themselves. We shouldn't be going after the general public. We need to be going after the main culprits - politicians with monetary agendas and oil and other anti-environmental businesses. These businesses resist at every opportunity, and are deeply ingrained in how the world works right now. However, and this is speculation, I suspect that it would not be entirely too difficult for these companies to jump into wind, solar, nuclear, and other cleaner sources of energy. We need to let people, businesses, and politicians know that the status quo is inherently dangerous, and that it is going to severely damage the planet if we don't make meaningful change, and soon.
We can do this in a variety of ways. The new "slacktivism" may even be able to help - this entails sharing environmental posts to your friends, signing petitions online, and other things that pop up. Like your local environmentally conscious groups on Facebook so they show up in your feeds. If you feel inspired, go out and get active.
I realize I've strayed quite severely from the original topic, so I apologize for that. Ultimately, party differences don't paint a very good line in the general public - but Congress has been highly polarized on a variety of issues for quite some time, and it is not surprising that climate change has similarly been polarized. Let's try to wade across party differences and make some meaningful change for each other, the country, and the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment