An Answer To The Question

You may have heard that global temperatures have flat-lined over the last decade. While these past few years have been overwhelmingly hot when you look at global mean temperature, there actually has been no increase in the temperature since roughly 1999. Climate deniers and global warming skeptics love to bandy this little fact about, saying it proves global warming and climate change are hoaxes. They just love to think that the scientific community doesn't know what it's talking about or that there is some huge leftist conspiracy driving scientists to come up with what they view as bunk.

However, as usual, scientific study has been able to determine this plateauing of global average temperature for the last 15 years. On ScienceDaily.com is an article detailing that researchers have found that water cycles in the Atlantic Ocean have been drawing down the heat down to the depths. Scientists participating in the research say this cycling occurs on roughly 30-year cycles, so this phenomenon will not occur forever. In addition, just because temperature has flat-lined does not mean global warming is no longer a threat. The carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are still trapping the heat within the confines of our atmosphere. Temperatures are still warmer today than they were 40 years ago. On top of this, all that heat being drawn down into the ocean could assist in the warming of our oceans which could have devastating effects on polar ice and the ability of certain species to thrive within their oceanic habitats.

Yes, science keeps giving us new things to be concerned about and they raise more questions, but they also find answers to these questions. This is the relentless pursuit of science - to discover the truth no matter how long it takes or how deep the research must go. That is why I love science.

Maybe This Isn't A Fool's Errand

Here is a link to The Guardian newspaper and an article that discusses that sometimes facts do convince the skeptics of climate change/global warming. That is good to know, but the real conundrum is how to convince those who seemingly refuse to be convinced. Is it possible? I don't know what the answer is, but I know I will still try and provide some insight into our environmental challenges and triumphs. Even if we can't get others to accept the evidence, we can learn more about our world and the global environment in which we live.

Lunacy and Money

My last post briefly mentioned that there may be a reason why people are not responding to the facts that climate change is indeed happening. We may be evolutionarily ill-equipped to deal with long-term, long-range threats because of our brain habits. There is that, but then there is the fact that plenty of leaders, both business and politicians pour money and rhetoric into discrediting climate change along with meaningful action to mitigate it. Today's post looks at the latter.

I was scrolling through Huffington Post today when I came across this article stating that a House Republican added an amendment to a Military Budget bill that forbade any usage of the ascribed funds to research the threats associated with climate change. The bill and amendment passed thanks to all Republicans and four Democrats voting in favor of the measure. The actual amendment is peppered with Tea Party and climate denial catch phrases such as Agenda 21 and the IPCC Fifth Report. No funding provided by the US government may be used in any research that may actually validate and assess the threats posed by climate change. This comes despite the fact that the Defense Department has repeatedly acknowledged the threat that climate change poses to national/global security and its military operations around the world.

So who is the House Republican that was behind this short-sighted amendment? It is none other than West Virginia Representative David McKinley. Rep. McKinley has a long history of climate denial. Last fall, he got himself embroiled with scientists over whether increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases global temperatures or not, passing himself off as an expert on the issue. You may have had the same thought I did when you saw that Congressman McKinley hails from West Virginia: "Of course! He comes from a state whose entire economy revolves coal." It is not hard to connect the dots between a once powerful industry afraid of disappearing and McKinley's climate denialism.

Some people may not alter their habits or reduce their carbon footprint because they do not comprehend the severity of this long-term, long-range threat and the part they play in that threat. For others - including businesses, it is simply about money. Their virulent, relentless attacks on sound science - science that has been settled for a considerable length of time - is because they don't want to lose money. Individuals like Representative McKinley are in the pocket of these fossil fuel industries, pushing their pseudo-science and denialist drivel to get the money the industry showers over them for campaign or other pet projects they want funded.

McKinley's disregard for the environment is clear. Every time a destructive coal-mining/fossil fuel practice or byproduct is being legislated against, Mr. McKinley always sides with the fossil fuel industry. Congressman McKinley is of the opinion that there is still a debate going on about climate change. His latest action, in regard to the amendment he proposed adding to the Military Budget, shows a man who is reacting to the mainstream acceptance of climate change as fact. He has the industry's back, but not the actual humans who make up his constituency. This is the problem with irrational people who wield power. Fact and reason may surround them, but they can still whip up enough frenzied support to control the direction we take on the environment through the purse strings. We can rejoice that many more are actually convinced of the science both professionally and on an individual level, but we must remain vigilant against those who continue to put forth fiction and flawed policy based on that fiction.