Denying Climate Change Requires Willful Ignorance

    376
    3
    SHARE

    If Admiral Titley doesn’t lose deniers when he addresses evolution, then their eyes will glass over when the discussion turns to data and real science for comprehension. Dismissing measureable data and employing the argument that trace substances are insignificant require the suppression of intelligence. It’s not stupidity; it’s fear.

    The sun’s radiation, measured by NASA for a half century now, has remained constant to within about +/- 0.3%. We also know that the greenhouse gasses reradiate long wave radiation. Again, that reradiation can be measured by NASA. The amount of heat leaving the atmosphere at those wavelengths has been decreasing. That’s the basics.

    To the objection that such trace amounts of carbon dioxide could have such tremendous effects, he discusses the effects of a trace of alcohol. Admiral Titley points out that if there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the average temperature would be about minus 1 degree Fahrenheit. Pre-industrial, the average on earth was about 59 degrees.

    It is the world view of the observer. It is curiosity and education. And it is not about a worldwide academic conspiracy to undermine capitalism. Five years ago, I was required to take a meteorology course through the State University of New York. In passing, the course addressed global warming as a not yet well understood phenomena still being debated. But that is the problem with the academic environment: it demands you think critically and for yourself. It’s much simpler to ignore change. Ignorance enjoys a simple explanation of complex issues. Ignorance is bliss.

    The Simple Truth: Climate Change Threatens Our National Security

    Security Threat 1: Opening of the Arctic Ocean

    Security Threat 2: Rising sea levels

    Security Threat 3: Ocean water acidification

    Today: A little more ammunition against skeptics (but they can’t handle the truth)

    • The question is, how do you get the vast majority of people to understand this science, which is extremely simple at its core, and then to demand action? Forget the hard-core “deniers,” no sense wasting time on them for the most part. But what about the 70%-80% or so of Americans who either already accept man-made climate science or are open to it? How do you “make it real” to them and persuade them that it matters in their lives and their children’s lives? So far, it seems like scientists and environmentalists have not been particularly successful in this regard…