Anti-Intellectualism 102 – The Politics of “Climate Change”

It used to be called “Global Warming”. Average air and sea temperatures are on the rise due to extra carbon dioxide in the Atmosphere. This extra CO₂ is causing a Greenhouse effect and is gradually raising temperatures everywhere. That was why it was called global warming.

Unfortunately, it was not so simple. We are seeing temperatures increase, but we are also seeing more extreme weather events, so now scientists call it “Climate Change”. This is a catch all phrase that is almost too general, but this is to try to satisfy the skeptics.

Scientists are supposed to be skeptical, it is one of our best tools to keep honesty and integrity an integral part of the scientific process. Unfortunately, skepticism has been abused in this case as in the case of Evolution. There is a great deal of evidence to show that there is too much carbon dioxide in our atmosphere and that this is a human caused event.

Blaming humans for anything worldwide has always been something that is never easily accepted. We like to think that all of our actions are always positive and good for everyone. Low priced items for Americans seem like a great thing for everyone. What about the American jobs lost to foreign countries, so that companies could charge less for their items because they are now manufactured much more cheaply since they only need to pay their workers $1 per hour instead of $15. So, are low prices the best thing? Well, that debate is pretty much over with the companies and the low prices are winning. You can try to fight against it and get something made in the U.S.A. but you will probably have to do a lot more research to find that item.

As I have said, when it comes to Climate Change, skepticism has been used to vehemently deny that there is anything wrong because a few scientist may not agree with the scientific consensus. The problem with that is that there is always a few scientists who will not agree with consensus. Heck, we still have a “Flat Earth Society,” although I would not call those people scientists. But, consensus means that there is a general agreement among most scientists and that is what we have when it comes to Climate Change. Therefore, we need to agree to do something to change our behavior. That is the hard part.

Just like with the worldwide financial crisis, the easy part is to see that there is a problem and that changes need to be made. The hard part is doing the changing and agreeing what needs to be done. So, if we never agree there is a problem we will never need to change, even when things are getting worse all around us. Yep, we are a bunch of ostriches with our heads in the sand.

The denial of the substantial scientific evidence for Climate Change is anti-intellectualism and the abuse of skepticism to deny it is a very cynical tool of politicians and companies. Hopefully, this cynical viewpoint will be found to not work for them soon. Approval of Congress is at an all time low, for Americans are skeptical themselves of any of Congress' actions of late.

In watching this debate that seems absurd, there are a few things I try to do: 1. Not vote for any candidate that belittles science in any way. 2. Try to change my behavior to lessen our carbon footprint. That is not easy because it seems to be expensive to be an environmentalist, but little things are a start.