The biggest debate in American politics isn’t one at all. Climate change is real, it’s man-made, and it’s happening right now. This is a fact, not a hoax or conspiracy, nor a fabrication of the so-called “liberal media.” This is not a debate.
We’ve all played nice and heard opposing arguments, but time is up. And if we’re truly being honest, to every single one of those that stand in the face of irrefutable scientific evidence and deny fact, we must ask: “Are you brainwashed or corrupt?” Let’s face it, these are the only explanations.
As such, we propose sweeping reform, and declare that all those who deny the existence of man-made climate change must wear one (or both) of these labels accordingly.
Climate change is real and we’re causing it.
Man-made climate change is a debate solely based on the power of doubt. Strangely, doubt proves the strongest weapon in 2015 America. It’s contagious, and it’s infected the global issue of climate change, slowing progress to a jilted halt. Stranger still, this doubt is a commodity, a service and campaign fueled by a bloated money trail.
Those that stand on the side of “climate-deniers” propel the cloud of doubt, corrupted by special interest money knowingly or otherwise. By denying the issue, these people place the future of life on earth as we know it in jeopardy.
And to those that scoff and call this an alarmist opinion—you’re goddamn right it is. Is the apocalypse upon us? No. But the situation of climate change is increasingly dire, to the point of no return. It’s already occurring and it threatens our planet with mass extinction and chaos. That’s enough to ring an alarm bell or two.
Since 1950, we’ve lost 50% of the earth’s wildlife. We stand at the precipice of the sixth mass extinction (defined as a time when 75% of life is lost) in our planet’s history. Though cataclysmic events caused the previous ones, mankind leads the current charge.
Again, this is fact as defined by the scientific method, not conjecture. The same applies to the figures below, which display a stark rise in global temperature, hence the term “global warming.” The graph below compiles statistics from separate research institutes (including NASA) working independently. This is the very definition of scientific consensus.
Though, if that’s not convincing enough, consider this:
97% of climate scientists agree on climate change
That’s a staggering percentage of people who dedicate their lives to climatology, all agreeing on the exact same thing. Of course, to the outlying 3%, we ask again: brainwashed or corrupt?
The rapid change in global temperature results from the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide, now at the highest point in 650,000 years, thanks mainly to the exorbitant burning of fossil fuels. This evidence is unequivocal and comes straight from NASA, not some crackpot website dealing in talking points.
This seems like one of those times we should trust experts, right? Well, despite this overwhelming consensus, 35% of Americans aren’t convinced, going against the 97% of scientists and refuting NASA.
That’s the equivalent of 97% of NASA experts agreeing that a spacecraft needs four propulsion engines to fly, and 35% of average joe Americans being like: “Na, we’re gonna go with our gut and just give it one engine.”
How is this possible?
The Merchants of Doubt
Let’s focus on the brainwashing aspect—when one follows the paper trail of great sums of money, they can reliably connect the dots of political motivation in America. As it happens, the 35% of U.S. citizens fall victim to the power of doubt, manipulated by a systematic smear campaign funded by the dollars and cents of special interest groups.
It’s no wonder the diatribe of climate deniers follows a script meant to transform a scientific certainty into an ongoing debate. For years, talking points on how the climate cycles naturally or “warmer is better” casted a shadow on the discussion. Take the infamous video below as an example:
In a baffling display of ignorance, Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) uses the existence of a snowball to disprove global warming—as in, he believes that because it snowed in Washington D.C. on a given day, the entire earth’s temperature is not rising. Obviously, weather does not equal climate.
What’s more, Inhofe isn’t just some old, out-of-touch politician, he’s the the chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee. Inhofe isn’t woefully stupid, either—he’s creating doubt on purpose.
The same can be said for Marc Morano, another prominent climate-denier and the founder of Climate Depot, who’s worked with Inhofe in the past, and is often featured on news channels to debate the climate issue against scientists.
However, Morano isn’t a climate scientist, he only holds a B.A. in political science, as in, he’s too dumb to be a scientist, too unmotivated to be a lawyer, and too basic to be an english major. So why the hell is Morano debating a topic he doesn’t fully understand, representing the 3% dissenting opinion in equal measure against the majority?
As he states in Robert Kenner’s new exposé film, Merchants of Doubt: “I’m not a scientist, but I do play one on TV occasionally… hell, more than occasionally.” And he’s paid handsomely for playing this role.
And then there’s Wei-Hock Soon (see: corrupt), an actual scientist and provider of climate-denier “studies” for years. Unsurprisingly, he’s received more than $1.2 million from oil and gas corporations, specifically ExxonMobil, who also hooked-up Chris Christie with some extra funds for a recent environmental bail-out.
Senator Inhofe often cited Soon’s work, claiming: “These are scientists that cannot be challenged.” It appears not.
All three of these deniers hold considerable influence, and each is connected by an intricate web of lies and money.
The Greatest Hoax
In the ongoing quest to undermine scientific consensus, James Inhofe wrote a book in 2010 titled The Greatest Hoax: How The Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future. Perhaps, this proves the most ludicrous argument of all against man-made climate change.
How exactly does reducing carbon emissions and pollution threaten anyone? When is scientific research ever truly threatening, other than when it holds the potential to dethrone those in power?
So, for a moment, let’s assume climate change isn’t man-made—America would still benefit greatly from investing and becoming a world leader in sustainable energy, as China and Germany (two leading economies) already are. The U.S. could finally ween itself off of inefficient fossil fuels, which compel us to ruin our environmental assets, and render us perpetually dependent on the Middle East.
Moreover, oil is a finite resource that will inevitably run out. It’s projected that at the current rate of consumption, the earth only supports 40 more years of use. Why would we not build infrastructure for a renewable power grid? It’s the most financially viable course of action.
As it stands, the scientists who study climate have absolutely nothing to lose; billion-dollar oil corporations, on the other hand, have everything to lose. Their entire business and existence is threatened by climate change, so it only stands to reason that they’re investing to prevent this.
It’s common sense. Unfortunately, that’s not so common anymore.
As the us vs. them pandering continues among climate-deniers, the fight to prevent catastrophic damage to our planet remains in useless gridlock. Meanwhile, the sea levels rise and Antarctica melts at an ever-increasing rate.
While Democrats and President Obama attempt to prevent further man-made climate change (and they’re moving pretty slowly), not a single Republican has even made a noteworthy statement acknowledging it’s very existence.
Regrettably, this article won’t convince deniers otherwise—so it’s time for real action. To every single climate-denier, take it upon yourself to ask: are you brainwashed or corrupt?
Here’s a good place to start: