Climate change deniers persist with their misinformation…
There’s been a flurry of climate denial activity coinciding with the 30 anniversary of James Hansen’s uncannily accurate testimony to congress on climate change, June 23, 1988. If you have not seen my vid on this, it’s at the bottom of the post.
Prominently, the Rupert (Fox News) Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal published a piece by serial climate denier and right wing think tank shill Pat Michaels, and a lesser known flack.
The piece is full of holes. Basically, “there’s been no warming since 1998 if you ignore all that warming.”
Dana Nuccitelli shines a light in the Guardian. Zeke Hausfather, above, has some supporting information.
The incredible accuracy of Hansen’s climate model predictions debunks a number of climate denier myths. It shows that climate models are accurate and reliable, that global warming is proceeding as climate scientists predicted, and thus that we should probably start…
View original post 687 more words
Wibble 
The way the debate has been manipulated is partly the fault of our side. We’ve allowed them to set aside the logical progression. In reality this is a debate about pollution control and as they’d lost the pollution debate they’ve repackaged the discussion into something many less people understand. We need to pull it back and label the deniers pollution promoters (or something along those lines), because that’s the result of what they propose.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You make a good point. If it’s not climate change they’re blathering on about, it’s some other (pollution-related) thing that, were we to take action to prevent it, would result in the End of Civilization As We Know It. Ironic, really, that their attitude will in the final analysis result in just that very thing….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nature will continue to make the truth increasingly more obvious! Great post!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
The ironic thing is, even if most of the climate scientists are dead wrong, switching to renewable and low-pollution energy sources makes sense economically, medically and geopolitically. If we weren’t dependent upon oil, we could’ve avoided a lot of wars and military actions.
I doubt they’re wrong, however. The numbers don’t lie…
LikeLiked by 2 people
I believe you’re right, they’re not wrong. The root cause of the problem is ideological: you’re absolutely right that making the right moves makes sense — to all but the few who profit from continuing to make the mistakes we’ve been making for decades :(
LikeLiked by 1 person
The problem with people who’ve gotten rich polluting our environment is that they are rich… that gives them a lot more votes than the rest of us…
LikeLiked by 1 person
… which of course is one of the many things wrong with our society :/
LikeLiked by 1 person