Year 3, Month 2, Day 17: Many Tables For One, In A Greek Restaurant

The Lehigh Valley Morning Call (PA) has a nice piece from a local allergist, discussing denialism in general in the context of a textbook dispute:

At a recent Saucon Valley School Board meeting, board member Bryan Eichfeld raised his concerns about a textbook proposed for the 2012-13 school year. The book was not a manual for teaching creationism in the classroom, nor was it a book espousing particular political beliefs. The textbook, “Globalization and Diversity,” simply spoke of the geopolitical, cultural and environmental impacts of — gasp — climate change.

Thankfully, the board overrode Eichfeld’s motion to reject the text, and for that it should be commended. However, the fact that this sort of science denialism is seeping into our schools and possibly hindering the education of our students is troublesome and deserves to be the topic of a healthy public discourse.

As an allergist in the Lehigh Valley, I have seen the health effects of a warmer climate — including an earlier and longer pollen season — firsthand. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the leading international network of climate scientists, first recognized the potential for climate change to impact asthma and allergic diseases in 2001, and I have been deeply concerned about the implications for my patients ever since.

The affects of global warming will extend well beyond my specialization, however, and the implications for everyone will be serious. Climate change will exacerbate extreme weather events, jeopardize the U.S. food supply and drastically alter the landscapes we call home. Educating the public on the science behind these risks and their consequences is the first step to confronting and mitigating this pressing issue.

I’m in kind of a hurry, so this was ideal for a generic “Republicans are idiots” screed. Sent Feb 12:

For more than fifty years, the Republican Party has waged a steady war on expertise and logic. Since the election of Ronald Reagan, the role of actual facts in GOP policy-making has steadily diminished. The eight years of the Bush administration showed us what happens when ideology trumps reality, and it’s not pretty. It will take decades to recover from the damage inflicted during that time.

Nowhere is this more problematic than in the public discussion over the issues of climate and energy, where a group of factually-challenged ideologues have hijacked the conversation. The Tea-Partiers have been cynically manipulated by (to resurrect Teddy Roosevelt’s phrase) “malefactors of great wealth.” Their denial of global climate change serves the temporary profits of a few, while delaying the long-term preparations necessary in the face of one of the greatest threats our species has yet confronted.

Warren Senders

Year 3, Month 2, Day 16: Just Put Your Lips Together And Blow

The LA Times runs a report on climate change’s impact on the Valentine’s Day celebrations of the future:

Let’s face it, climate change is incredibly un-sexy. We don’t care how many nude protesters are involved. But it’s about to get worse. A new mini-report from the environmental group Climate Nexus points out that climate change is poised to wreck Valentine’s Day, or at least change it significantly, by threatening chocolate production.

That’s right. Global warming is very bad for chocolate.

As reported by The Times, research from the International Center for Tropical Agriculture found last year that as temperatures rise, the principal growing regions for cocoa could shrink, especially in Ghana and Ivory Coast, the sources of half the world’s supply. Production could fall off dramatically by 2050, making cocoa less available and more expensive.

Play it, Sam. Sent February 11:

While global warming’s impact on chocolate production is certainly going to make a difference in the way we observe Valentine’s Day in the coming decades, we don’t need candy for romance — after all, “moonlight and love songs are never out of date.”

But another love story’s coming to an end. Our culture’s century-long infatuation with consumption cannot survive the economic and infrastructural transformations coming in the wake of worldwide climatic disruption. Since the early twentieth century we have come to believe that if we purchase the right goods and services, our frustrations will be relieved, our suffering mitigated, our status enhanced. But as our civilization grows up, we must learn to make choices that are in the best interests of our descendants. When confronting the reality of a slow-motion planetary catastrophe, consumerism turns out to be fickle, inconsiderate, and wasteful — hardly the right material for a long-term relationship.

Warren Senders

Year 3, Month 2, Day 15: Problems Of Scale, As Usual

The bigger the political system, the less competent it is to address the problem. The Albany Times-Union:

ALBANY — Seven “hundred-year floods” have hit the Catskills during the last 15 years, and lobsters have grown so scarce in Long Island Sound that lobstermen have given up trying to make a living there.

As a result, it’s time for the humans to start figuring out how to protect the trout, lobsters and countless other species being challenged by climate change.

That’s the problem state and federal environmental officials and scientists are grappling with in the middle of a winter that been virtually snowless in much of New York.

A group gathered at the state Department of Environmental Conservation headquarters Thursday to work on a plan for protecting plant and animal life in the decades to come.

While political pundits may still be debating global warming or the impact of greenhouse gases, a broad consensus of scientists have agreed the climate is changing.

Extinction is bad for the bottom line. Sent Feb 10:

It’s good news that state and local governments are taking action to mitigate the expected effects of climate change. But it is shocking that the federal government remains paralyzed by ideological squabbling in the face of what is arguably the greatest threat human civilization has yet faced. Did I say “squabbling?” Perhaps that’s the wrong word, since all the name-calling, vituperation, and misinformation are coming from one side of the political spectrum.

If Republicans and their financial backers were to consider the implications of climate research objectively, several things would happen. First, they’d stop denying the factuality of global climate chaos, and start working actively to slow it down and to cope with its impacts. Second, they would recognize that preserving the planetary systems on which our culture depends is as important for market capitalists as it is for radical “tree-huggers,” for a profitable economy requires environmental stability to flourish.

Warren Senders

Teach Your Children Well

My friend Hema J_____ sent me this article she wrote on the ways her family is gradually reducing the amount of waste generated by their household. It’s a great example of the cumulative effect of many small changes in behavior. I asked her if I could reprint it here and she graciously agreed.

Daily Acts Toward A Waste-Free Life.

Early in 2011 a friend passed me an article from Sunset magazine. The article, titled “Zero-waste family in Marin”, described how this family managed to live a pretty normal life with no waste.

The article immediately made a deep impression on me. It reminded me of my childhood in South India. Growing up in the 1980s in the small city of Trichy, I never saw my family throw anything away. Our neighbors were no different — there simply was no garbage service! “Zero-waste” was just a part of the lifestyle there, at that time. Of course things have changed there now. Back then, we always carried our own bags and baskets to the grocer. We even bought cooking oil in our own steel containers. Milk was measured in liters and delivered at our doorstep, as was butter. We bought grains (paddy and wheat) in huge jute sacks, took them to the mill and brought home the flour. Meals were always made at home. So were snacks, yogurt and sun-dried goods.

Inspired by the zero-waste family in Marin, I started looking closely at my own everyday life putting garbage that I produce into perspective. It helped a great deal to watch the documentary “No Impact Man.” What ensued was a series of small changes towards reducing garbage that have added up over time, with the result that we have put out our municipal trash can only twice in the last twelve months, and the recycling can only a few more times. I will now take you on a short tour around our household, and talk about the changes we have integrated into our everyday lives.

To begin with a little background is in order. We are a family of four: my husband, a boy (8), a girl (5 ½) and me. We live in a duplex condo in California, in a pretty typical American suburb built in the early 1990s.

Grocery Shopping.

Let’s begin with the bags. We have a few bags of bags in our car trunk that we carry for grocery shopping. This includes the transparent plastic bags too. Since we always reuse our bags, we hardly have the need to use new ones provided at the store. Some stores even offer a small discount for bringing one’s own bags! It was such a pleasure to discover the bulk bins at our local stores. We buy most of the organic staples that we need — including yeast, fig bars, vanilla extract, soba noodles and pasta — from the bulk bins now. We found that a lot of times it is cheaper to buy organic items from the bulk section. My kids were of course delighted to see ginger cookies, sesame sticks and raspberry bars there. “Mom! Organic snacks in the bulk bins! No chemicals and no plastic! Can we buy these?” A few months into this mode of shopping, we realized that all that we needed was located in the periphery of the stores. By avoiding the center aisles we were reducing the plastic we were throwing away and also probably buying healthier at the same time.

The bulk bins brought to our notice other grains that we have now introduced into our diet. Our breakfasts now include millet, corn meal and steel-cut oats. And I shouldn’t forget to mention the fresh ground peanut butter that my kids simply love. We take our own (empty) glass jar, get it weighed initially (tare weight) and refill our jar. Some local stores have a wide range of items in their bulk bins.

We buy our eggs directly from local farms or friends that have chicken coops or the farmers’ markets. We return our empty egg cartons to the farmers. We learned about the energy-intensive recycling process involved with the plastic milk containers; we were not entirely happy about the details of it. So we switched to milk which comes in glass containers; we pay a deposit of $1.50 at the time of purchase and that is credited when we return the container. We buy cheese only if we can find a vendor (at the Farmers’ market) who is willing to sell a small unwrapped wedge. This necessarily means going without cheese most of the time. Considering the energy involved in the production and sales of cheese, we have decided to include it only occasionally in our meals as a special treat. The ideal situation would be to become vegan (we have always been vegetarians), then we won’t have to worry about these details.

Kitchen.

We have a green waste receptacle next to the sink where all our vegetable and fruit scraps go. There is no trash can under the sink now. Instead I have reclaimed this space for much needed storage for small appliances like the blender and the jars, the sandwich/waffle maker etc. I noticed that even after making changes to the way we grocery-shopped, our main source of plastic was the bread that came in plastic bags. One option was to switch to breads available in paper bags. Instead, I decided to take up the daunting task of baking, something I had never really done before. I decided to get help and enlisted a friend to be my baking teacher. She walked me through a great recipe for a delicious whole wheat loaf. Every week or so, I faithfully follow her recipe make three loaves at a time. The kids love to get involved and the whole process has evolved into a greatly enjoyable culinary ritual.

To maximize the use of the oven, I also make granola or baked pasta on the same day. We also make our own yogurt (just add live culture into warm milk), jams during summer and various kinds of simple dips and sauces like hummus and apple sauce.

Refrigerator/Freezer.

We have a relatively small energy-efficient refrigerator/freezer where we store dairy, veggies, fruit and leftovers. Having just enough space to store meant that we could never over-stock and also ensured that leftovers waiting to be eaten caught our eyes and are not wasted.

Pantry.

We have a bag of bags where we put back the grocery bags after transferring everything from the store into their respective containers. This bag is moved to the car once it has enough bags.

Kids’ Corner.

We use only one-sided paper from the mail and from my husband’s office for arts. The kids have a small basket under their table to discard used paper; when it overflows they take it to the recycling bin in the garage. They have similar baskets in their rooms for recycling paper. The kids mostly use pencils, color pencils, crayons, chalk pastels and water color for their art work. We don’t buy markers, sharpies, etc.

Office/Mail.

We mostly receive electronic statements and pay our bills online. We signed up at various places to stop junk mail from flooding our mailbox. There is a recycling bin under the table in our home office. We decided not to own a printer just to avoid the unnecessary printing that the convenience offered. We use scrap paper to write down driving directions off the Internet.

Dining Area.
At the table, we have a small pile of cloth napkins, for use during meals and also to wipe off spills that are frequent with kids around.

Clothing.

Thanks to a friend with slightly older children, we almost never buy new clothes or shoes for our kids. We have established a nice network to circulate these hand-me-downs and everybody that participates benefits from it. We buy under garments new and the rest is all from local thrift stores. This includes my clothes too. It took me a while to get comfortable with shopping at the thrift stores; it is looked down upon in India. Now I enjoy the benefits it offers – less expenses, supporting our local economy, reducing garbage, etc.

Cosmetics.

I have some stick-on bindis (decorative jewels for the forehead) from India and one lipstick (which I have hardly used). I use a rechargeable electric razor. It has lasted many years. Some local stores sell shampoo, soap, detergent etc. in bulk. We take our own containers and get them refilled. I read about people using baking soda as a deodorant and liked that option.

Laundry.

We buy laundry detergent powder that comes in cardboard boxes; recycling plastic detergent containers needs more energy. We don’t use the dryer most of the year; we either sun-dry or air-dry (drying the clothes in the garage out of the sun, especially during the rains) our laundry. We plan our laundry days based on the weather forecast, during the rainy season. This keeps our PG&E bill in the $20’s during summer and around $50 during winter.

Sanitary Needs.

A friend surprised me when she said she could count the number of instances she had used a commercial feminine sanitary product. She said that she had always used good quality cloth. I was guilty of the fact that after moving to the U.S., I had conveniently forgotten the norms in India and had transitioned seamlessly to the disposable-ways of living that is prevalent here. I switched back to cloth and found it to be very easy and natural. Recently I heard from a friend about the Diva cup. It certainly is an equally good, sustainable and comfortable alternative.

Parties and Gifts.

I have a set of about 2 dozen plastic plates and silverware just for party needs. We share this party set with local friends. We invite a small group of friends and families to the birthdays of our children. We serve homemade food and snacks or local fruit and veggies. We have inconvenienced some of our friends by asking them not to bring any gift, so we now request them to bring in any used book, toy or game that their child has outgrown. That works very well. The best birthday gift so far has been the farm-fresh eggs from my friend’s backyard!! Our birthday gifts to my kids’ friends have been books, homemade desserts, homemade jam, handmade crafts and gift cards to local stores.

Eating-out.

We choose places that have reusable china and silverware. Also we have one or two of our small containers handy (in the car) just in case we have leftovers.

Car.

We have a steel water bottle and a coffee mug in the car along with the bags of bags in the trunk. We have a couple of spoons and forks that have come in handy many times.

Purse.

My kids asked me if I could carry two little spoons for tasting the samples at the grocery stores. There couldn’t have been anything better to ask! It was quite rewarding to observe that they have taken the zero-waste lifestyle seriously.

House Cleaning.

We use a rag or sponge to clean the kitchen counter thereby easily eliminating our need for paper towels. We have laminated floor downstairs which are swept with a broom and the dirt is put back into the garden or compost. We mop the floor with a mop that uses a cloth pad. Our bedrooms are carpeted which are vacuumed once in a while. We do throw away the bags. We have separate rags to clean the bathroom floors.

Trash Cans.

We do have a trash can in the garage and toilet for emergency reasons and also for the convenience of our guests. We discard our old toothbrushes, empty toothpaste tubes (only some brands have recyclable tubes) and vacuum cleaner bags.

Recycling.

It was a shock for us to realize that recycling was only marginally better than dumping something into the landfill. The Internet has all the details, if you are interested. Basically, we realized that recycling is a good beginning but clearly not sustainable and does not come close to reducing waste.

Now, you may think this is a lot of hard work. Well, it actually isn’t. It is a different way of perceiving and planning so we can simply reduce our impact on this beautiful Earth. I shop once a week at a local grocery. During the summer, we buy our produce from the Farmers’ market, so we go to the store once every 10 days to 2 weeks. I cook once a day for a maximum of 30 minutes; there are days when we eat out too.

Our family life is fun-filled. We enjoy a wide variety of activities with the children – including gardening, cooking, vocal music, instrumental music, arts & crafts, board games. Our almost-waste-free philosophy doesn’t stop us from having fun, not one bit.

By treading gently and serving as the role models, we hope our children may take it up too. By involving the next generation we hope to preserve the nature of this only Planet we have. Also, every once in a while some of the following thoughts and questions arise in my mind and they help me stay on track:

• My mom and grandma certainly raised their kids in a more eco-friendly way than me. When I have conflicts in my mind — whether to do something in a certain way — I look up to their ways and that helps me choose the right course, which always takes the environment into consideration.

• If I spend a little bit of extra time shopping, planning and organizing, I can save Mother Earth thousands of years that she will need to decompose the waste I would have produced otherwise.

• When something seems very convenient or very cheap for an unknown reason, I stop to think “Who is actually paying the price here?” That helps me not fall into the trap.

• Years ago, I was disturbed to read a news article that said the U.S. shipped garbage to poor, developing countries. Since I am from one, it bothered me deeply. I have seen both the worlds – America that ships garbage and Indian slums that sit on mounds of garbage. America certainly “looks” clean. The garbage does go away from our houses. But where is “away”?

Year 3, Month 2, Day 14: What Are You Going To Believe? Me — Or Your Own Lying Eyes?

The Christian Science Monitor reports sorta kinda not really very good news:

U.S. scientists using satellite data have established a more accurate figure of the amount of annual sea level rise from melting glaciers and ice caps which should aid studies on how quickly coastal areas may flood as global warming gathers pace.

John Wahr of the University of Colorado in Boulder and colleagues, in a study published on Thursday, found that thinning glaciers and icecaps were pushing up sea levels by 1.5 millmetres (0.06 inches) a year, in line with a 1.2 to 1.8 mm range from other studies, some of which forecast sea levels could rise as much as 2 metres (2.2 yards) by 2100.

Sea levels have already risen on average about 18 centimetres since 1900 and rapid global warming will accelerate the pace of the increase, scientists say, threatening coastlines from Vietnam to Florida and forcing low-lying megacities to build costly sea defences.

Have another beer. Sent February 9:

The climate prognosis is bleak; while glaciers aren’t melting quite as fast as predicted, our planet’s polar regions are severely weakened.  It’s unlikely that they will recover in our lifetimes or those of our children, for the damage they’ve sustained from the burgeoning greenhouse effect is very severe.

Unfortunately, it’s very likely that the talking heads populating our airwaves and news outlets will seize on this news, brandishing a decontextualized nugget of information (“The glaciers are going to be fine!”), extrapolating incorrectly from it (“All the doom-sayers were wrong!”), confusing the discussion (“You can’t trust scientists — they’re often mistaken!”) and advocating for inaction (“Don’t worry, be happy — and keep buying gas!”).

The news that her tumors are metastasizing more slowly than expected is good news for a lung cancer patient, but it does not change the severity of the diagnosis — or provide an excuse to resume smoking.

Warren Senders

Year 3, Month 2, Day 13: Get A Brain! Morans!

Aw, jeez. These idiots again? Check it out. The NYT:

Across the country, activists with ties to the Tea Party are railing against all sorts of local and state efforts to control sprawl and conserve energy. They brand government action for things like expanding public transportation routes and preserving open space as part of a United Nations-led conspiracy to deny property rights and herd citizens toward cities.

They are showing up at planning meetings to denounce bike lanes on public streets and smart meters on home appliances — efforts they equate to a big-government blueprint against individual rights.

“Down the road, this data will be used against you,” warned one speaker at a recent Roanoke County, Va., Board of Supervisors meeting who turned out with dozens of people opposed to the county’s paying $1,200 in dues to a nonprofit that consults on sustainability issues.

Oy. What can you do with this kind of dreck? Sent February 7:

In the minds of Tea-Partiers, everything is evidence of a conspiracy. If enough people are riding bicycles that municipal governments incorporate bike lanes in street planning, that’s not simple good sense — it’s a conspiracy. If research suggests that informing people about their energy consumption decreases waste, that’s a conspiracy, too. If the accumulated evidence supporting the existence (and threat) of global climate change outweighs that compiled by deniers by a twenty-thousand-to-one ratio, that’s just proof that the scientists are in on it.

Richard Hofstadter’s analysis of the “paranoid style” in American politics — “…heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy” — has never seemed so accurate. Imagine the benefit to our country if these suspicious zealots could stop obsessing about a Socialist New World Order concealed in an innocuous UN memorandum about environmental responsibility, and instead turned their energy towards making a more cooperative, just, and sustainable society.

Warren Senders

Year 3, Month 2, Day 12: Warmer Weather Means More Squirrels! Squirrel! Squirrel!

Papers everywhere are reporting on the wacky non-winter most of us have been, um, enjoying. Here’s an account from the Southeast Missourian:

In the Tot Lot, more than a few children horsed around in short sleeves. Families strolled around the lagoon. A laughing toddler — sans coat — chased after a disinterested dog.

A typical spring day at Capaha Park. Except it was February.

The temperature hit 65 degrees in Cape Girardeau on Thursday, setting a record high for Feb. 2, according to the National Weather Service at Paducah, Ky. The service, which has tracked temperatures locally since 1960, said Thursday’s temperature broke the record high of 62 degrees, which happened previously on Feb. 2 in 1964 and 1974.

“This is great,” said Jason Mulholland, who was at the park with his wife and two young sons. “You could almost have shorts on. If I was out running, I would have shorts on.”

February’s milder-than-usual start follows the fifth-warmest January in Cape Girardeau on record, weird weather that has caused the 17th warmest January in Washington, D.C., the third-warmest in Phoenix and the 13th warmest in Ann Arbor, Mich.

Nothin’ to see here, folks. Move along. Move along. Sent February 6:

When reporting on local weather weirdness, it’s essential to avoid any mention of broader regional, national and planetary patterns. The fact that Southeast Missouri’s winter has been several degrees warmer than usual is no reason for alarm. Nor should we be worried that in Massachusetts, the only significant blizzard this winter was in October, or that Yosemite National Park, normally blanketed, has remained essentially snow-free all winter, or that Texas’ ongoing drought has completely dried up portions of the Colorado river. Australia’s deepening flood crisis may have left thousands of people homeless, but that’s over there, not over here.

Really?

While no single weather event can be unequivocally linked to global climate change (science simply doesn’t work that way), climatologists have been telling us for years that the burgeoning greenhouse effect is going to disrupt weather patterns everywhere around the planet. Perhaps it’s time to pay attention to them.

Warren Senders

Published.

Year 3, Month 2, Day 11: I’d Like To Be / Under The Sea

The Pakistani daily “Dawn” runs an article on the plans of island nations to attempt legal pressure on the irresponsible giants:

UNITED NATIONS: Small island nations, whose very existence is threatened by the rising sea levels brought about by global warming, are seeking to take the issue of climate change before the International Court of Justice.

Johnson Toribiong, president of Palau, said Friday his country and other island nations had formed an expert advisory committee to bring the issue before the U.N. General Assembly. That would allow the world court in the Hague to determine the legal ramifications of climate change under international law.

”If 20 years of climate change negotiations have taught us anything, it’s that every state sees climate change differently. For some, it is mainly an economic issue … for others it’s about geopolitics and their past or future place in the global economy, but for us it’s about survival,” Toribiong said.

”Pacific countries are in the red zone, a swell of ocean where waters have risen two or three times higher than anywhere else in the world. That differential might explain why we speak about climate change so urgently and we look to everyone in every corner of the United Nations to find a solution,” he added.

Michael Gerrard, director of the Center for Climate Change Law at Colombia University and a member the advisory committee, said the idea is to have a court determination compelling developed nations to control emissions of the greenhouse gases believed to cause global warming in the absence of an international treaty.

I would loooooove to see that happen. Sent February 5:

The incapacity of the developed nations to address the looming climate crisis would be pathetic if it did not hold such tragic consequences for the rest of the world. Paralyzed by the overwhelming influence of multinational corporations, the United States and its allies are unable to respond even to an obvious emergency like the plight of island nations. It’s a curious irony that even as countries like Palau, Kiribati and the Maldives unflinchingly confront the rising sea levels that may soon submerge them, the industrialized West is drowning, unawares, in a toxic flood of corporate cash and media misinformation.

Eventually, of course, those petrol-paid politicians and their enablers will discover that in the wake of the greenhouse effect, there is no safe harbor. In a sad reversal of John Donne’s maxim, even those living on the economic high ground will learn: in a climate-changed world, every nation is an island.

Warren Senders

Year 3, Month 2, Day 10: We Don’t Do Long-Term. We Only Do Short-Term. Got It?

The Chicago Tribune writes about the epidemic of stupidity among TV weathertrons:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

But weather forecasters, many of whom see climate change as a natural, cyclical phenomenon, are split over whether they have a responsibility to educate their viewers on the link between human activity and the change in the Earth’s climates.

Only 19 percent of U.S. meteorologists saw human influences as the sole driver of climate change in a 2011 survey. And some, like the Weather Channel’s founder John Coleman are vocal in their opposition.

“It is the greatest scam in history,” wrote Coleman, one of the first meteorologists to publicly express doubts about climate change, on his blog in 2007. “I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; it is a SCAM.”

Jeebus, I hate these people. Sent February 4:

While there are still minor areas of uncertainty remaining in the scientific consensus on planetary climate change, it’s a fair bet that when television weather tycoon John Coleman calls global warming a “scam,” he is really describing his own work, not that of the world’s climatologists. The evidence corroborating humanity’s contribution to the greenhouse effect is overwhelming; as study after study adds to the collective understanding of climate scientists all over the world, the denialists’ position becomes increasingly untenable.

By advocating for improbable conspiracy theories and the views of fringe scientists, celebrity meteorologists undermine their own credibility. The fact that the denialist position is so common in the broadcast world simply demonstrates the corrosive power of big money’s influence in the media. Mr. Coleman’s term “scam” says more about the behavior of the fossil fuel industry and the info-tainment celebrities whose loyalty it has purchased than about scientific reality.

Warren Senders

Year 3, Month 2, Day 9: There Is No Word For That In Our Language

John Monahan writes a nice piece in Modern Times Magazine (AZ) addressing climate change denial, with specific reference to the WSJ flap. The whole piece is well worth your attention.

Feb. 3, 2012 — What a crazy seven days it has been for the climate change debate. Scientists from both sides of the issue took to the Wall Street Journal late last week and early this week to opine on the merits of the issue and what should be done about it.

But that’s just putting it nicely. What really happened is one side said the other was wrong — knowingly in an attempt to hide the truth — in pursuit of riches.

To say it even more bluntly, each said the other was the ‘real’ greedy liar.

The most important bit is the part where he quotes James Hansen, who is, as usual, right:

“Public doubt about the science is not an accident. People profiting from business-as-usual fossil fuel use are waging a campaign to discredit the science. Their campaign is effective because the profiteers have learned how to manipulate democracies for their advantage,” Hansen said. “The scientific method requires objective analysis of all data, stating evidence pro and con, before reaching conclusions. This works well, indeed is necessary, for achieving success in science. But science is now pitted in public debate against the talk-show method, which consists of selective citation of anecdotal bits that support a predetermined position.”

Simply, Hansen is saying corporations are using the scientific method to bolster an argument that has little merit only because it serves their bottom line. He also places blame upon the mainstream media, calling their need for “balance” a means to validate bad science and support corporate positions.

“Today most media, even publicly-supported media, are pressured to balance every climate story with opinions of contrarians, climate change deniers, as if they had equal scientific credibility. Media are dependent on advertising revenue of the fossil fuel industry, and in some cases are owned by people with an interest in continuing business as usual. Fossil fuel profiteers can readily find a few percent of the scientific community to serve as mouthpieces — all scientists practice skepticism, and it is not hard to find some who are out of their area of expertise, who may enjoy being in the public eye, and who are limited in scientific insight and analytic ability,” Hansen wrote.

They have a 500-word limit; I took about 225 to try and tie all these phenomena together. Sent Feb 3:

Climate-change denial is part of a larger problem, one exemplified by the anonymous Bush official who told journalist Ron Suskind, “We’re an empire; we create our own reality,” and ridiculed those who lived in the “reality-based community.” Conservative politicians and electoral strategists appear to believe in a post-modern universe where measurable reality is just another kind of fiction. Examples of this are easy to spot.

The anti-evolution politicians whose claim that “science is just another religion” serves as a rationale for their attempts to introduce creationism into public school science curricula; the runup to the war in Iraq, in which facts were manipulated and cherry-picked to support President Bush’s martial agenda; the legislators in some Southern states who seek to have any mention of slavery simply removed from history books — the list goes on and on.

Climate change denial is by far the most damaging of these delusions. Human science has discovered and illuminated the laws of physics and chemistry, but that doesn’t mean that the “we make our own reality” crowd can apply wishful thinking to the greenhouse effect. Given enough time, American culture could recover from forced creationism, historical revisionism, and clueless warmongering — but if we fail to recognize the imperative need to address climate change, we’re not going to have the chance.

Warren Senders