By Brent Fewell
I bring your attention to a great article by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus as the IPCC releases this week its latest report on climate change. Pointing to the work of Robert Bryce, Steve Hayward, and even the Koch Brothers, the article begins,
Over the last decade, progressives have successfully painted conservative climate skepticism as the major stumbling block to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Exxon and the Koch brothers, the story goes, fund conservative think tanks to sow doubt about climate change and block legislative action. As evidence mounts that anthropogenic global warming is underway, conservatives’ flight from reason is putting us all at risk.
This week’s release of a new United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report opens another front in the climate wars. But beneath the bellowing, name-calling, and cherry-picking of data that have become the hallmark of contemporary climate politics lies a paradox: the energy technologies favored by the climate-skeptical Right are doing far more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than the ones favored by the climate-apocalyptic Left. [continue reading]
Lest you dismiss this criticism of the climate-apocalyptic Left, Nordhaus and Shellenberger are dyed-in-the-wool liberal, environmentalists. The article is well worth the read.
What is that they tell kids in school? there are no stupid questions?
The scorched earth politically motivated take no prisoners approach of climate activist to dehumanize and delegitimize anyone who asked any difficult question – whether reasonable or not – has done far more to harm science and the prospect of future environmental progress and conpromise than everything they accuss their opponents of.
Michael, no disagreement from me on the harm caused by the politicization of this issue. However, we have our own fair share of conservative and GOP affiliates who have politicized this issue. Inasmuch as apocalyptic doomsaying is inaccurate and unhelpful, so isn’t the narrative of those who continue to perpetuate the myth that AGW is a “hoax.”