Year 2, Month 9, Day 3: If wishes were horses, there would be lots of wish-poop on the street.

The August 30 Kansas City Star reprints a column from the LA Times by Eugene Linden, called “Betting The Farm Against Climate Change.” Good stuff:

Leon Trotsky is reputed to have quipped, “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.” Substitute the words “climate change” for “war” and the quote is perfectly suited for the governors of Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico, all of whom have ridiculed or dismissed the threat of climate change even as their states suffer record-breaking heat and drought.

In his book, “Fed Up!” Texas governor and presidential aspirant Rick Perry derided global warming as a “phony mess,” a sentiment he has expanded on in recent campaign appearances. Susana Martinez, the governor of New Mexico, has gone on record as doubting that humans influence climate, and Mary Fallin of Oklahoma dismissed research on climate change as a waste of time. Her solution to the extraordinary drought: pray for rain (an approach also endorsed by Perry).

Heh heh heh. Sent August 30:

The exigencies of Republican electoral politics have been biased toward the surreal for decades, but the current season is by far the most bizarre. Even at their most anti-intellectual moments, GOP aspirants have always offered some form of glib lip-service to American scientific achievement and technological progress. No more; the new standard is a vehement rejection of anything that requires logic, analysis or the interpretation of facts. The irrelevance of actual data to conservative philosophies of governance is unsettling; traditionally, politics is called “the art of the possible” — surely a reality-based way of putting it.

While these politicians don’t believe humans are influencing the earth’s climate, they’re absolutely certain that the inconvenient reality of catastrophic global warming will vanish if we deny it strongly enough. If refusing to accept facts actually makes them go away, perhaps we should all deny the existence of Republican politicians.

Yeah. That oughta work.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 9, Day 2: Mirror, Mirror On The Wall

The August 29 Houston Chronicle reprints Paul Krugman’s shrill analysis of Republican epistemic closure:

Jon Huntsman Jr., a former Utah governor and ambassador to China, isn’t a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination. And that’s too bad, because Hunstman has been willing to say the unsayable about the GOP – namely, that it is becoming the “anti-science party.” This is an enormously important development. And it should terrify us.

To see what Huntsman means, consider recent statements by the two men who actually are serious contenders for the GOP nomination: Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.

Perry, the governor of Texas, recently made headlines by dismissing evolution as “just a theory,” one that has “got some gaps in it” – an observation that will come as news to the vast majority of biologists. But what really got peoples’ attention was what he said about climate change: “I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.”

Unbelievable (facepalm). Sent August 29:

Rick Perry evokes a terrifying form of nostalgia for those of us who remember another science-hostile Texan politician who occupied the White House not too long ago. His assertion that climate scientists “manipulate data” to keep “dollars rolling into their projects” may be a grotesque misinterpretation of how science works and how scientific consensus is established, but it is a perfect example of what psychologists call “projection.” Since manipulating data is how conservative politicians maintain a steady flow of cash for their own interests, he assumes that scientists are equally venal and mendacious. While there are unscrupulous climate scientists, they turn out to be the ones on the fossil fuel industry’s payroll.

In attributing his own motives to members of the scientific community, the Governor insults countless dedicated researchers who are still trying to warn an increasingly oblivious citizenry of grave and imminent dangers. Shame, shame, shame.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 9, Day 1: Variations On A Theme II

The August 28 Boston Herald addresses Irene with an AP article listing the people who’ve been killed so far along the storm’s path.

Too bad the planetary environment isn’t a missing white woman. So I sent them this version of the same concept on August 28:

If our media handled hurricanes as they’ve handled climate change over the past few decades, we’d be deafened by choruses of “hoax,” gratuitous mockery of storm warnings, and bland assertions that “scientists disagree” on the existence of tropical storms.

And if we discussed climate change the way we’re discussing Irene, our media would regularly update current threat levels, we’d disseminate advice on preparation, and plans for handling the future’s extreme weather events would be on everybody’s lips.

Extreme weather is short-term, fitting the needs of our 24-hour news cycle; climate is long-term and won’t adjust to our national case of ADD. But if we don’t substantially address climate change, the coming centuries’ news will be all weather, all the time.

Warren Senders