Monday, August 13, 2007

Healthy Skepticism Toward Climate Crisis Denial

Today, I noticed an article in The Register warning of YET ANOTHER HEAT WAVE striking us in Orange County this week. maybe for some people, this just means another chance to go to the beach or to throw a "BBQ by the Pool" party. But for me, I see more than just that. I see yet more evidence of a global climate in crisis that has already begun to affect us locally.

Yet Jubal/Matt Cunningham somehow had the nerve to post this a week ago on OC Blog:

It goes without saying that injecting any degree of skepticism toward the figures and findings wafting from the climate change industry will likely lead to being branded a "traitor" by the Mahdi of Climate Change, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. -- but it's still a free country in which we can voice such skepticism. In the old Soviet Union, dissent was treated as a form of mental disease -- which isn't too different from the way the EnviroLeft views any who don't unquestioningly follow the party line.

And that's my point -- we ought to be skeptics on this issue, especially since the policy solutions being pushed by the Left involve the expansion of government power over our lives. Barbara Boxer flies over a glacier and to her that's "proof" of climate change -- as if she needs proof -- the aggrandizement of government power inherent in the Left's "save the planet" strategies is enough for her to believe in global warming.

HUH?! What on earth is happening to those folks at OC Blog? I guess they haven't been able to wake up and smell the inferno the way the rest of us in the reality-based community already have.

Follow me down below for more...

(Cross-posted at The Liberal OC)

OK, first off... When did the far right begin to value dissent? After all, Matt has called all of us who oppose this disastrous occupation of Iraq "defeatists". So when did it become acceptable to question known science, but not bad foreign policy? Now I'd never want to take away Matt's right to question known science, but I'm just wondering why he has a problem with people like me who don't see any value in continuing Bush's failed war.

Next off, when did the real science of climate change become "a matter of controversy"? And when did it become "anti-business" to recognize that in finding solutions to this crisis, that new opportunities may arise? The science is real: Nearly all scientists agree that climate change is happening, and that we humans are contributing to this. Oh yes, and even most businesses today recognize that they need to be a part of the solution not only to survive on this planet, but to also survive in the global marketplace. I guess these right-wingers who want to continue denying reality are the ones who are truly "anti-business", as they don't want our economy to remain competitive against other nations' economies that have already adapted to the new environmental reality.

And finally, why must all of us who believe scientific reality be branded as "EnviroLeft extremists"? When did reason become "extreme"? When did science become "extreme"? And when did science denial become "normal"? I just don't get that.

Maybe I'll never be able to enlighten the folks at OC Blog who aspire to become the next Flat Earth Society in their extreme denial of scientific reality. Whatever... If they want to deny reality, let them. I just hope that we, as a society, never base public policy on the denial of reality. That's all.

No comments: