Backlash: The Beginning

Last night, I was given a copy of the Wall Street Journal with a big opinion piece about climate change: The Climate Change Climate Change.

In it, the author, discusses the new trend of being a climate change denier.  According to this, there are a large number of politicians and scientists who claim that climate change is the “worst scientific scandal in history.”  They claim that they are looking at the data more closely because of the impact from the recession and it has left them with no doubt to believe it just does not exist; racking it up to something no greater than a new religion.

Surprisingly, the most outspoken of them all is a politician from Australia, Steve Fielding.  Why this is surprising is because of the impact Australia is facing due to changing temperatures; drought, fire, food shortages, and rising temperatures.  But this man can sit there and say there is not enough scientific evidence.

What is interesting to me about this type of article is this notion that we, who believe that climate change is real and moving closely upon us, seem to want it to occur.  That we are looking forward to it and that we are damned that we haven’t been able to provide concrete evidence that it exists. And, not only that, but when asked, these same “deniers’ are not providing data to the counter, either.  Despite that, it is all the fault of those who “believe” that are allowing legislation to go through and decisions to be made based on false information.  (Of course, when the Federal Reserve does it causing economic collapse, they turn a blind eye.  But, when it comes to the collapse of an entire species, they are screaming from the rooftops.)

What I am trying to say is this: that maybe there is a 50/50 chance that climate change does not exist.  I certainly hope so.  If climate change does exist and I change my lifestyle accordingly, then we have caught something before it is too late.  If it doesn’t exist, then my changes will have little impact and will be a net neutral to the planet.  If I don’t change my lifestyle and climate change doesn’t exist, again… net neutral… no impact, no change.  But, if I don’t change my lifestyle and climate change DOES exist, then the impact I have made onto the planet is drastic and life threatening.

So.. my question is this… why are some people so adamant to not change, and do small things that might greatly alter the planet, just for the sake of being right?

opinion: Selling the Revolution

by Matt DeNoto

If you’re reading this, I assume you’re sympathetic to the cause. Or you’re my mom. (Hi Mom!) You already understand that human actions are having effects on the planet’s climate. You know that we have been living in a wasteful, inconsiderate, destructive population for years now. You have seen that too often, money has taken precedence over responsibility. In other words, I’m mostly preaching to the converted here.

But how do we reach out to those who do not understand? How do we explain things in such a way that they become excited about getting involved in all the changes that will soon be taking place?

The first step of course is to consider their point of view. I’m going to overgeneralize here, so take it all with a grain of salt, but I think in many cases people hear about ‘saving the environment’ and they get the impression that we want to take away their cars, stop them from eating their favorite foods, and make them join hands around a campfire while singing ‘Kumbaya.’ And it scares them. They think we want to take away the things that make them happy, the things that make their lives easy. They have the mistaken impression that we won’t be happy until everybody is living in a hut with a dirt floor, wiping our butts with leaves.

The very simple idea that we should try and get across is that the Green Revolution is all about making their lives better.

For example, buying food and products generated locally not only cuts down on pollution (because if it’s made locally, it didn’t have to be shipped there by a giant, exhaust-spewing truck), it also keeps money in the community, as opposed to having it shipped off to some corporate headquarters. Plus the fewer trucks on the road, the less traffic you have to contend with.

An even more cut-and-dry example is this: If you live in an area that gets a lot of sun and were to install solar panels on your roof, not only would you get free electricity for your own home, you’d actually feed any extra power your panels generate back into the system, for which the power company PAYS YOU.

Another thing to remind them of is that they are already part of it. Over the last twenty years, refrigerators have done the same job using less than half the electricity. And the less energy their refrigerators use, the lower their energy bills are. The revolution has already been improving their lives without them even noticing.

I know thinking about it this way may upset some of those who think that more drastic, immediate change is necessary. People who think we have to stop producing harmful chemicals NOW and stop living off of fossil fuels NOW. I’m sympathetic to those points of view, but trying to shove ideas down the throats of people who can’t even bring themselves to use CFLs will simply engender more defensive suspicion and bitterness. By introducing small, demonstrable benefits to the masses it will be easier to help them start thinking more about the consequences of their actions and choices.

The more of us that care, the faster the revolution can go.