Things I Don't Understand Pt. 2: Climate-Change-Ism
How in the Hell did climate change become a partisan issue? This one's really got me stumped.
It would be one thing if the argument was just over whether or not humans have caused climate change. But, it's not. The protests I hear are "Global Warming? Hah! You scientists, with your fancy measuring doo-hickies are trying to tell us what to do!" The protests I hear are actually scoffing at the data.
The data is pretty clear, folks. Climate change is occurring. Whether or not we caused it, we need to be prepared to (at a minimum) deal with it. It would be nice to think that we could solve it, but I'm not that optimistic right now. I'm one of those that believes that the number of us on the planet spewing crazy amounts of crap into the atmosphere must be having some kind of effect. But even if you don't agree with me on that point, you must agree that we need to do something to prepare for the changes ahead... right?
Apparently, not...
Climate change is upon us. The Earth is warming. Much is at stake. It may cool again later, but does that mean we should sit idly and wait for that to happen? Why can't we agree that's happening and look ahead to adjusting our behavior to compensate without pointing blaming fingers.
Is it that the issue was first brought to popular attention by Al Gore? Part of me thinks this is true. I think if Al Gore said, "I like chocolate," the Tea-Party types would be lining up to throw M&Ms into Boston Harbor. Is it that there is a fear that conscientious behavior is antithetical to free markets? It's already been shown by many that "green business" can mean big money.
What is it? Why does the Right feel the need to deny climate change other than the fact that the Left feels the need to promote addressing it?
It would be one thing if the argument was just over whether or not humans have caused climate change. But, it's not. The protests I hear are "Global Warming? Hah! You scientists, with your fancy measuring doo-hickies are trying to tell us what to do!" The protests I hear are actually scoffing at the data.
The data is pretty clear, folks. Climate change is occurring. Whether or not we caused it, we need to be prepared to (at a minimum) deal with it. It would be nice to think that we could solve it, but I'm not that optimistic right now. I'm one of those that believes that the number of us on the planet spewing crazy amounts of crap into the atmosphere must be having some kind of effect. But even if you don't agree with me on that point, you must agree that we need to do something to prepare for the changes ahead... right?
Apparently, not...
Climate change is upon us. The Earth is warming. Much is at stake. It may cool again later, but does that mean we should sit idly and wait for that to happen? Why can't we agree that's happening and look ahead to adjusting our behavior to compensate without pointing blaming fingers.
Is it that the issue was first brought to popular attention by Al Gore? Part of me thinks this is true. I think if Al Gore said, "I like chocolate," the Tea-Party types would be lining up to throw M&Ms into Boston Harbor. Is it that there is a fear that conscientious behavior is antithetical to free markets? It's already been shown by many that "green business" can mean big money.
What is it? Why does the Right feel the need to deny climate change other than the fact that the Left feels the need to promote addressing it?
posted by bigsoda at
9:06 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home