Climate change isn’t going to stop just because most Republicans and Tea Party folks don’t believe in it


Some people seem to think that the issue of global warming is like a political contest in which votes of the populace on one side trump votes on the other side. But it’s not.

Public opinion polls don’t really affect climate change — except, of course, to the extent that they can influence government policy in dealing with the challenge. In the final analysis, however, the global climate continues to change no matter who believes it’s happening or why.

Steven D has more to say about this HERE.



  1. George Will Nails it:

    Six million years ago the Mediterranean dried up. Ninety million years ago there were alligators in the Arctic. Three hundred million years ago Northern Europe was a desert and coal formed in Antarctica. “One thing we know for sure,” [Robert B. Laughlin, co-winner of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Physics] Laughlin says about these convulsions, “is that people weren’t involved.”


  2. Neftali: The reality of anthropogenic global warming isn’t affected one way or the other by anything that George Will writes.

  3. What we are.


    Do the evolution.

  4. The reality of anthropogenic global warming isn’t affected one way or the other by anything that George Will writes. Or what anyone else does, either


  5. shawnnews

    Science literacy might be another great column idea Pat.
    I was just terrible at science in high school and college because as the jargon increased, my attention dropped. Nevertheless, although I couldn’t be a doctor or an engineer then, I knew that the results of science couldn’t be discredited just because I couldn’t understand the specific details of them.
    I think in terms of evolution, global warming and other theories people have a problem with — they can’t imagine the theory so they don’t think it’s possible.
    I wish science, technology and reasoning were more visual than “look at these numbers. Look at these graphs.”
    National Geographic does an OK job.

  6. If you like trout fishing, you might consider packing your bags and heading South.
    Interesting article in todays Trib:

  7. Yes the climate will always be changing, there’s no arguing that fact. On the other hand, the issue of global warming…… It’s just another way to control the masses and extract large sums of money. All one needs to do is a little research instead of listening to every lie that comes along.

  8. hokumboy: Thanks for the link to that graphic. That’s good stuff.

  9. shawnnews

    I didn’t know it but “climate change” is a Frank Luntz GOP term.

  10. That’s OK, Pat.
    Ya gotta love the Trib.
    I couldn’t get through the mornings without it.

  11. shawnnews

    Terry is spinning half-truths he’s probably heard from conservative sources.
    The scientific peer-reviewed literature of the time foucsed on global warming while the national magazines did a few cooling stories.

  12. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703376504575491643716526782.html?KEYWORDS=lomborg&mg=com-wsj

    First, a little background. Ever since 2001, when I published “The Skeptical Environmentalist”—a book in which I argued that the world’s environmental problems were getting better—I’ve been wrongly accused of being a global warming denier.

    The fact that I’ve always asserted the reality of man-made climate change never seemed to make an impression on my critics. What mattered was that I had the temerity to question two key tenets of the received wisdom about global warming: I was skeptical of the idea that we were facing the apocalypse, and I didn’t accept that the only solution was to mandate drastic cuts in carbon emissions.

    That’s the way it is with heresy—there is no middle ground. Either you believe global warming is the worst problem mankind has ever faced and that cutting carbon is the only solution, or you are an antiscientific ignoramus who probably thinks the Earth is flat.

    I suppose I should take some comfort in the fact that I’ve been accused of being both a denier and a warmist. But the polarized nature of the global warming debate is no laughing matter. Limiting the debate to only two valid positions—for or against—makes a constructive discussion impossible. If we truly want to make progress on climate change, we must acknowledge a middle way—one that recognizes that while we do need to deal with the reality of global warming, solutions based on worst-case scenarios will actually do more harm than good.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *