THE CLIMATE CLOCK December 12, 2012Posted by wmmbb in Global Warming (climate change).
The times are out of joint. Existing political institutions and the underlying structures of economic and social power have delayed effective responses to the climate crisis, and the delay will continue.
Technological change tends to have with increasing rapidity, depth and extent. Political responses have been retarded. The natural tendency in human affairs is to resist change, since change is inevitably threatens the existing power structures and the systems in which they function. Power structures are artificial constructs, which can be see illustrated by the nation states framed by imperialism, in both the developed and less developed world, which in turn represents international power relationships. The threat posed by the international fossil fuel corporations to the well being of Earth’s ecology cannot, it seems, be clearly and plainly identified, nor can the relationships they have with nation states.
Four years ago, National Geographic was decidedly alarmist about what now seems likely:
Amy Goodman interviewed the leader of WWF following the Doha UN Climate Conference:
So perhaps, it makes sense and is realistic to suggest that because of political inertia a world with a 5 degree rise in mean surface temperature is going to happen. It would be so much better if the consequences could have been avoided, and with appropriate foresight they could have been.
Sheldon Whitehouse calls out his colleagues for ignoring the climate cliff in US Senate:
Descriptions and words matter. I seem to remember Nomimalism was a philosophy. Many who oppose the findings of climate science are not sceptics. They more accurately described as climate change deniers. A sceptic would in addition to questioning the findings who raise directed questions about the observations, measurements, methods and propose alternative hypotheses that could be independently verified. Generally, that is not what climate deniers do. The claim that the Earth has not warmed in sixteen years, for example, is based on an egregious misrepresentation of the data and statistics, with a complete failure and disinclination to attempt to understand the nature of the system that is creating the measurements and observations.
The processes that can be observed of scapegoating and attribution are indicative of the psychology of climate deniers, in there own way quite disturbing. So how then might we talk to climate deniers:
Or, maybe send them Chasing Ice:
We cannot chose our reality. For example, in the normal course of living and dealing with the world, we cannot chose xray vision, and if we did it fail. The clock is ticking, and this time the governor is the atmospheric and ecological system changing remorselessly as a direct and cumulative result of human activity. If the poor go first, the rich will follow.
- More on persuading people, especially denialists – use consensus (amanwithaphd.wordpress.com)
- Time to finally check out climate science debate? (blogs.abc.net.au)
- Debating climate change: Are all doubters really ‘hapless’ or ‘greedy’? (oregonlive.com)
- Deniers Are Not The Problem, Naysayers Are (treehugger.com)