This is my problem. When climate change scientists make their catastrophic warnings, they are completely ignoring the historical record. In many ways, they are as Luddite against this historical record as the far right is against their work. I also have a problem with this in that this historical record of warming and drought is being completely ignored. Which is worse – ignoring history and living for science, or ignoring science and shilling for corporate profits?
“...If Republicans and their creationist voting bloc want their children to enter adulthood with an understanding of the world that rivals stone age cave-dwellers, that is their prerogative and more power to them. However, their assault on real science is an existential threat to every American including those who believe tyrannosaurus ate plants with man on the 6th creation day, and adamantly believe their tenure on this Earth is approaching its end because they will be spirited away when Jesus returns in five years. However, for Americans and the rest of humanity, the prospect of a world ravaged by droughts, water and food shortages, and air saturated with poisonous fossil fuel emissions is a clear and present danger that cannot be ignored if they are to survive…”
There can be no doubt that corporate greed is encouraging the far right to ‘hate’ science. It is in their best interest to damn science and create their own version of science. It is a good thing that science is fighting back. Climate change is very real. To deny it is to deny the historical record. Let’s be brutally honest here. It’s all about the Koch Machine.
“…Petroleum coke is a byproduct of the refinery process of the tar sands oil, which leaves refineries with a huge amount of the coke after it sends the oil onward. The coke usually just piles up (Canada has 79.8 million tons stockpiled), because it’s a dirty, and mostly inefficient energy source. But the industrialist/harbingers of the apocalypse Koch Brothers had a better idea: why not sell this high-sulfur, high-carbon waste to countries that don’t care about the environment?
And that’s exactly what they did. “It comes down to emission controls,” D. Mark Routt, an energy consultant, told the Times. “Other people don’t seem to have a problem, which is why it is going to Mexico, which is why it is going to China.”…”
The Pink Flamingo is a student of history, and a geology buff. I know enough about geology and volcanology to know that what man can do is petty compared to nature. To ignore the effects of sun spots on climate change is foolish. To ignore the possibility of a meteor strike is foolish. To ignore unchecked pollution is criminal.
Yes, tar sands are a disaster. Are they going to contribute to ‘global climate change’? We just don’t know. What we do know is that the process if filthy. It contributes to pollution. Natural Gas is much cleaner. But – far right corporate billionaires don’t give a damn about any of that – only the bottom line. The far right, billionaire protecting his turf is going to pay for rally bad science to prove he is right. The liberal (who doesn’t have near the money) is going to do the same thing. One of the real problems here is the fact that the far right and the far left are basically the same, only with different names, labels, and goals. The tactics are the same – cruel and vicious. Climate change science and those who worship it, refuse to acknowledge that science often gets things wrong. It’s the nature of the beast. Science is NOT religion. Religion is NOT science. We have a very real problem when those dealing with science turn it into something as dogmatic as the worst aspects of organized religion, forgetting that the true nature of science is theoretical, with the unexplained as the true beauty of science. Let’s deal a little with climate change. Neither side is ‘pure’. The left likes to refer to a site called Skeptic Science. The problem with this is the fact that it is maintained by John Cook, who is out of Queensland. His pro-climate change stand is as a classic debunker. The Pink Flamingo has serious problems with debunkers. They are as much true believers as are the nut-cases, only in their determination to disprove anything with which they do not believe. When you find someone who debunks the debunker, the first question to ask is who is paying them. This is what Cook allegedly ignores.
For more information on this, and the problems Cook is ignoring: There is a bottom line. Climate change ‘experts’ are picking and choosing what they want to believe, and what they want others to believe.
So, you try finding something that might debunk the debunkers and it is industry owned. A Koch backed anti-debunking organization came out with an interesting paper on CO2 levels and the medieval warming period. The problem is that it is sponsored by Koch, and the paper completely ignores the role of volcanism. What fascinates The Pink Flamingo is that the skepticism NOT being displayed toward John Cook is interesting when compared to the peer-reviewed work Melba Ketchum did on Bigfoot DNA. The uproar was huge. Cook’s work is NOT peer-reviewed and it isn’t good science, but because he is preaching to the choir on the religion of climate change, his work is hailed as gospel truth. Just read the comments.
The series continues tomorrow.