Climate Change Disinformation
It would be easy to think that the fossil fuel industry’s aggressive disinformation campaign, attempting to discredit the theory of anthropogenic global warming, was abandoned years ago, and that the overwhelming body of evidence in support of the theory has long since made it impossible for any credible person or organization to deny the facts concerning our warming planet. Hell, even I thought this was essentially true, and I study this stuff for a living.
You (and I) would be wrong. Conservative think tank The Heartland Institute (see their 2012 ad above), funded by the Koch Brothers and other fossil fuel giants, is still vigorously engaged in sewing doubt on this subject, a full four decades after the effort began. In an attempt to reach every K – 12 teacher in the United States, they’ve sent a textbook called Why Scientists Disagree on Global Warming to 350,000 educators around the country. Those who use it and related curricula get up to $1200 in classroom supplies for free, courtesy of ExxonMobil and the rest.
Has it been effective? Well, check out the video linked above, and consider that 6 out of 10 teachers do not present the idea that human activity is contributing to climate change, then judge for yourself.
There is a battle being waged for our children’s minds; it’s not wise to pretend otherwise.
That is horrendous! How could they do that and how can the teachers just accept it because of the free school supplies! That is absolutely outrageous!
Craig and Susan,
It’s called “Freedom of Speech”,! The US Constitution guarantees all forms of lawful dissent.
Now here’s an important question for you Susan, have you actually read the book you feel is so horrendous ?
If not, why are you so eager to condemn something, just because someone posts a critique on Facebook !
I’m not sure if even Craig has actually read the book, despite his boast “I study this stuff for a living”. (I might be mistaken, I hope I am).
The book was written during at the height of excitement over global warming, a period when claims and counter claims were being hotly debated with extremist passions dominating debate.
The first edition appeared in 2015 and was immediately and fanatically attacked by Democratic U.S. Senators, Sheldon Whitehouse, Elizabeth Warren, Brian Schatz, and Edward Markey (none of whom had actually read the book either!). Demands were made for the arrest and prosecution of the books author, while some extreme advocates called for criminal sanctions against “climate deniers” , even advocating death.
Curiously, at the time, Craig praised the attack by Democratic U.S. Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, Elizabeth Warren, Brian Schatz, and Edward Markey , none of who have any scientific training, against the highly qualified scientist authors of the book.
The main theme of the book (I’ve read both editions) is to keep an open mind, promote debate and discussion. (are these horrendous objectives ?).
Among the books conclusions :
” Rather than rely exclusively on IPCC for scientific advice, policymakers should seek out advice from independent, non-government organizations and scientists who are free of financial and political conflicts of interest”
Doe you consider that horrendous ?
Or;
” In the face of such facts, the most prudent climate policy is to prepare for and adapt to extreme climate events and changes regardless of their origin. Adaptive planning for future hazardous climate events and change should be tailored to provide responses to the known rates, magnitudes, and risks of natural change. Once in place, these same plans will provide an adequate response to any human-caused change or the scale that may or may not emerge “.
It is important scientists must be ready for their pet theories to turn out to be wrong. Science as a whole certainly cannot allow its judgment about facts to be distorted by ideas of what ought to be true, or what one may hope to be true.
Are these such “dangerous’ concepts to be kept away from Students ? Do you or Craig, really believe such idea’s “outrageous ?
The book does dispel the myth that 97% of scientists have reached consent on global warming and climate change. This was always a media misunderstanding of an IPCC quote. It was never true, a fact conceded by the original authors of the IPCC report, by like many myths it’s hard to kill.
Do you consider teaching children to always check the veracity of information instead of just accepting popular belief, wrong and outrageous ?
More importantly, in your outrage to defend “science” (or some science)why are you advocating censorship ?
What’s next ? Book burning nights, held in the name of defending “true” science ?