Coming Home: Chronicling the (re)creation of the JP Green House A Grist Special Series

We're with you. Really.

Climate deniers, hold your fire! 22

28 Nov 2009 1:19 PM
by Andrée Zaleska
- Author Feed
Posted in
- Climate & Energy
Read More About
- deniers

I went through a tough half-hour of disbelief this week, when I encountered a very ordinary story in the Boston Globe. It was about the revised estimates of sea-level rise for the next thirty years and how they will affect our city (guess what?—more of it will be underwater!) The article was short, unremarkable, grim and based on peer-reviewed science. Then there were the comments. Dave Pomerantz from Greenpeace had emailed the story to a group of Boston 350 activists, noting that the deniers were going wild and we needed to counter by posting something.

As I scrolled down through some 50 replies, I found nothing but rage and denial at the scientists’ findings, with a lot of righteous citing of the recent ClimateGate “scandal” around the emails hacked from the University of East Anglia. Here’s a few typical quotes:

“There is absolutely no truth to this whatsoever. Go to www.telegraph.co.uk/news/James Delingpole or www.jamesdelingpole.com. The scam is just ‘the tip of the iceberg.’ Global warming is a conspiracy by left wing loonier scientists looking for $$$ and nothing else from all Gov’ts.”

and

“Climate change is a proven, coordinated fraud that’s been foisted upon the masses by politicans and corporations. The NY Times, Fox and others are reporting on the recently uncovered shenanigans of the “climate researchers,” yet the Globe is still pounding the drum of hypothetical hysteria. $463B worth of damage here in Boston? When? Ridiculous.”

I wanted to help out, but by the time I got to the end of the multi-author screed, I was nauseous and had nothing to say. But I’ve got something to say now, and I will address it to the deniers themselves.

I want to make it clear to those of you who doubt the science that tells you our world is warming dangerously due to human burning of fossil fuels—so much so that civilization itself, and up to half of the earth’s species are threatened by a cataclysm that we may have little power left to effect—that we agree with you. I am speaking for the activists, the scientists, the writers and pundits who keep throwing this climate change thing in your faces. We are absolutely, 100% with you, and though you perceive a conflict of interests, political or existential or otherwise, there is NO conflict. We do not want this, we do not want to believe this, and we would give anything in the world to be wrong. If you see (correctly) that there are big egos invested in promoting the idea of climate change, then be assured that they are only there, puffed up all out of proportion, to counter the big egos of the opposition (coal and oil industry CEOs—egos, what?)

There is nothing we want more than to be wrong—to go home, forget it all happened, and retreat, shamefaced, to live out our ordinary lives. Every climate activist I have ever met is being eaten up from within: Every fiber of our being tells us that this shouldn’t happen, that it’s inconsistent with a loving God, or with a theory of evolution that states that a species wants above all to survive, or just with the basic horse-sense that people will never do anything to endanger themselves and their children. Even those of us who are bona-fide tree-huggers, militant vegetarians, or radical-simplicity wackos, still do not wish this on anyone.

Everyone is a denier. (Okay, maybe not Adam Sacks!) We all read every scrap of science with the same hope that there will be new evidence of a cooling trend, or a colossal mathematical error that proves that carbon isn’t trapped in the atmosphere at all, it’s all benignly wafting out into space. We wait for that breaking story that the ocean is full of healthy coral and fish, and the dead pine forests of Canada will awaken and flourish again, because this just isn’t possible! The planet can’t die—who would let that happen?

Some of us differ only in our incapacity to turn our heads away. For whatever reason, we have lost the ability to believe that we are somehow protected, whether it be by a benevolent creator, the intelligence of our species, the government, the positive, life-affirming forces of market capitalism, what have you.

It may be a different process for others, but I think most of us who stare directly into the bright sun of climate change are convinced that the scientific method—rigorous, peer-reviewed, replicable data—if not the scientists themselves, is sound and leads to the truth, however hard it may be. Science is bigger than the will or desire of any scientist, and though not infallible, it is ethical. It is worthy of our faith and our humility, and it repeatedly reveals the persistent will of the earth to follow its own laws, and not ours.

I can let the scientists and the activists speak for themselves, and they have done so already. I’m only weighing in here to make one point, and that is that there is no conflict. We should call off any battles we think we are waging.

Activists—remember your own fear and denial. Deniers—please note that no one on earth could possibly want this…and then consider the facts.

Comments

Andrée Zaleska is the co-founder of the JP Green House, and a community organizer who works for the Institute of Policy Studies. More information about the JP Green House can be found at jpgreenhouse.org.

Joel W Posted 2:00 pm
28 Nov 2009
I totally agree. It's obscene to think that would people actually wish such a hideous fate upon the world or that they'd conspire with each other to create such fear.

For those who deny anything is happening, I suggest they go and visit some of the places already affected and speak to the people who live there.

http://www.greenexplorer.ovi.com/getinspired/australasia/australia/climate-change-deniers-holida/
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 2:57 pm
28 Nov 2009
I just left a comment on another Grist article but I think it would have been more appropriate here, so I'll repeat it.

I suspect the global climate change debate may evolve into an intractable stalemate, a marathon of trench warfare with science on one side, and people who have flipped their self-deception anxiety reduction switches on the other.

The latest two rounds (Climate Gate and Global Warming takes a break) have convinced me more than ever that the science is sound thanks to all of the knowledgeable individuals in the comment fields who have taken the time to debate the skeptics.

Beware the armchair climatologist:

http://biodiversivist.blogspot.com/2009/11/armchair-climatologist.html
Permalink
Matt N. Posted 10:26 pm
28 Nov 2009
I'm certainly with you here, nothing makes me more angry then when someone implies that I might be perversely enjoying my "alarmist" views, or at the very least an idiot for being duped by a massive conspiracy headed by ... Al Gore? More and more I question which will a skeptic more, the newly updated 2 meter sea level rise predictions or my fist in their face. Violence is never a viable option for obvious reasons, especially when what we need is consensus building and trust, but what options are we left with that we haven't tried? Perhaps hunger strikes or rally's like the one 350.org organized will have an effect, but the cynic in me says that it will take no less then an environmental disaster of the scale of Katrina in this country before the public clamors for action. An even more disturbing part of me wishes it would happen before we dig this hole any deeper. Bitter rant I know, but anyone like Ms. Zaleska who has read through one of these frightening comment threads can likely understand my frustration. But no, better to just to appeal to the (dubiously) superior minds of our political leaders and adjust our daily consumption.
Permalink
guygoesgreen Posted 10:35 pm
28 Nov 2009
I now have had deniers come up to me and push the "all climate change is bunk" message in my face. It seems in the few times this has happened, my follow up (which includes facts and valid follow up) has never been responded to. Almost like only the headline has been read and not the substance.
Permalink
1. human power Posted 8:02 pm
  29 Nov 2009
  Do you mean to say that there is something to read beyond the headline? What next, political debate that transcends bumper stickers?
  
  You are quite correct that most Americans refuse to read beyond the sensational dribble that is put there to attract eyeballs. It is almost as if we have become all emotion (although without compassion) and no intellect.
  Permalink
guygoesgreen Posted 10:35 pm
28 Nov 2009
I now have had deniers come up to me and push the "all climate change is bunk" message in my face. It seems in the few times this has happened, my follow up (which includes facts and valid follow up) has never been responded to. Almost like only the headline has been read and not the substance.
Permalink
Alison in Portland Posted 6:21 am
29 Nov 2009
Excellent piece, Ms. Zaleska, especially your reminder that we activists need to be tracking our own fear - and I would add, our grief. As a former counselor, there is another thing, actually a psychological disorder, I believe is going on with some naysayers. I describe it here: http://www.diamondcutlife.org/the-psychology-of-naysayers-on-global-warming/
Permalink
Chris Pratt Posted 7:56 am
29 Nov 2009
I have worked my whole life to try and live lightly on the planet,promote conservation of land, energy, and wildlife, so it saddens me greatly to see society going full bore in the other direction. If I have any interest in seeing global warming come to pass, it is only to impress on people that we live in a delicate balance with nature and should not take our planet's life support system for granted. Warning signs of climate change have been with us for 15 years. The changes are coming to pass as predicted and some worse than predicted, what more will it take. What is upsetting is that it looks like society needs a bigger event to make an impression and by that time it will be too late to take meaingful action. I don't want to read anything more about the melting of the polar ice caps, the melting glaciers, the loss of species like the polar bear. The planet has given us plenty of warning signs and too many people just don't want to hear it. Science has taken the earths vital signs and we don't want to heed them.
Permalink
randino Posted 9:42 am
29 Nov 2009
What is behind denialism on climate change, is a lot more than just denialism. People would be well advised to put down their Al Gore, and take a look at the recent history of the world headquarters of denialism - the Republican Party. The GOP possesses an overall antipathy to the environmental movement that is now hard wired into its political DNA. This is in contrast to an earlier history where everyone points to Teddy Roosevelt, and the support of key environmental legislation during the Nixon administration. There are three sources of this antipathy. First was industry reaction to Silent Spring. A reaction that wrote the manual on how to fight science based critics for industry. It has been used by the tobaco industry, agribusiness, and now the climate deniers. Second, was the shift of power in the GOP from the Northeast, to the Sunbelt and that regions visceral hatred of federal land ownership and management in that region and by guilt by association, environmentalism. Third, is that the fight against environmentalism was rolled into the culture wars that came out of the 1960s and were so productive for the GOP's fortunes.

Behind all this are the political battles within the GOP for who will set the agenda for the party in the future. The tea party right and its enablers are in a campaign to push moderate Republicans into extinction. Their goal is to create an ideologically pure party. And few things are higher on their list of red button issues than climate change. There may be some conservatives who believe in human caused climate change, but they have already gone into the witness protection program. For any who doubt the political hazards of fessing up to climate change as a Republican politician, just look at the treatment being dished out to South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.

I have debated deniers on other sites, and have quit doing so. I quit because I realize that eternal debate is part of that old game plan that goes back to Silent Spring. I quit because I realized that it really is not about global warming. It is because these people fundamentally hate environmentalists and consider us to be their substitute bogey men for the now defunct communist movement. I quit because I realize that reason has nothing to do with moving the debate with these people. For them it is a matter of political faith, and their own personal identity. Short of a crisis of faith, or complete mental break down, these people do not change. I quit, because I realized that practically any time spent doing anything else at all - from picking my nose to being active in the climate movement - is time better spent than debating these fanatics. I also have a saying. Debate a fool, become a fool.

Finally, climate change is just one more item in our society's stagnation and gridlock. American society, when it comes to the challenges of the 21rst century, is like the proverbial deer in the headlights, ie venison. But that is another discussion.

Randy Cunningham
Cleveland, OH
Permalink
1. ron dickerson Posted 6:50 pm
  29 Nov 2009
  Great Points Randy,
  
  It is quite ridiculous to attempt to convince these deniers of the error of their ways. Really a pure waste of time and effort.
  
  Much of the denier rhetoric is just GOP taking points. Moreover this tactic has shown some measure of success as many bloggers get bogged down attempting to herd these cats. It becomes re-run of boring political slapstick.
  
  The discussion has stalled!
  
  So much needs to be addressed beyond the typical dumbed down divisive diatribe. Where is the discussion about the solutions going forward? How do agreements and proposed solutions become recognizable to foster enough support for success? Is developing a carbon trading market the game changer, or another distraction?
  
  A little more complex than name calling...
  
  But it would be a more satisfying use of time to read some meaningful and informative thoughts.
  Permalink
Zain Posted 12:57 pm
29 Nov 2009
Thanks for sharing this article!
Permalink
Steven Earl Salmony Posted 3:02 pm
29 Nov 2009
The family of humanity is presented with a colossal problem, second in magnitude only to climate change as a threat to human wellbeing and environmental health. Currently, corporate entities are perversely regarded under law as having individual rights like those that citizens of a country possess. A patina of corporate 'citizenship' masks many kinds of illegitimate, immoral and fraudulent activities that are promulgated by arrogant, dishonest and greedy individuals within huge international financial and production enterprises. These corporate entities are so gigantic that no nation-state on Earth can any longer reasonably and sensibly contain them.

Which major corporation, multinational conglomerate or industry "owns" your country's governance mechanisms...democratic principles and practices notwithstanding?
Permalink
human power Posted 8:30 pm
29 Nov 2009
It appears that most of the folks who claim to understand that climate change could well alter the planet to such an extent that humanity is finished have more in common with the deniers than just a hope that something will cause climate change to stop. I refer to the actions being taken by my fellow "environmentalists". If you drive a car, you are a denier based on your actions. Are you heating your house even though you live where outdoor lows rarely dip below 20 F? How's that meat? Still using a clothes drier? These are actions that scream much louder than any organized march ever will. The other deniers look at the hypocrisy of calling for dramatic change by others while making only small cosmetic changes oneself and they get a bit peeved.

If the large percentage of Americans who claim to take climate change seriously would just behave as though they did, then we could buy ourselves a bit of time to deal with this mess. However, as long as we continue to consume vast resources and emit (and have emitted for us) vast amounts of GHG, then we are the deniers.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 1:16 am
30 Nov 2009
We just don't seem to have what it takes anymore to face down the opposition. I saw it at the healthcare townhalls, our side was afraid to be impolite with disruptors and tell them to take their turn, make their point and then let others make theirs.

Even simply asking (as a group) for civility was too much for our side, much less actually standing up to troublemakers. In some places officials actually let armed men linger around outside meetings unchallenged, we said and did nothing.

In France when students or farmers or workers need to make a point and stand up for themselves, they take to the streets until they get some action.

Somewhere between the labor movement in the 30s and anti-war protests in the 60s and now we lost our will to try. The Obama campaign felt like we were getting our initiative back, but after it was over we went right back to the same old timid ambivalence.

It's a sad truth to face up to. American progressives have become wimps. The democratic party in most areas has been infiltrated and taken over by (ex?) Reagan republicans. Our "majority" in congress is not. The majority in congress is controlled by lobbyists.
Permalink
1. randino Posted 6:00 am
  30 Nov 2009
  Wimps are not made in a day. There are a number of reasons for the passivity you see around you, for the fact that thousands (that is of us) are not out in the streets. First, progressives are loath to do anything that will weaken the President before the forces of Mordor. They are pulling all their punches. Now, what the president is doing to weaken himself is a different story! Also, after being stomped into the ground by Republicans and betrayed by Republicans in Democratic drag for almost 30 years, progressives are like abused children. Happiness to them is not being locked in a closet 24 hours a day, with hourly beatings. Second, is that America is a lot more repressive now. Ever since Seattle, law enforcement has taken a zero tolerance attitude towards any street activity. You take it to the streets and there is a very good chance you will end up in jail, or worse. That is not very attractive to most of us. Third, life itself has become much, much harder. I saw this in the community organizing movement in Cleveland twenty years ago. With the deindustrialization of Cleveland, families had to have everyone including the dog and cat hold down a job to make ends meet. This dried up the volunteer base. You did not have people available to stuff envelopes or go to a "hit" against a bank. These hard times also make 501c3s much more hesitant to risk the ire of their funders by moving from advocacy to activism. Fourth, you have to blame the communications technology we are using on Grist. Computer activism has replaced the old face to face, lets get on a bus and drive 12 hours for a demo in DC. People are not only using their computers. They are also hiding behind them.
  
  Put all these factors together, and you see why it is our opposition, and not us, who are taking it to the streets.
  
  Randy Cunningham
  Cleveland, OH
  Permalink
  1. B Amer Posted 7:07 am
    30 Nov 2009
    Wonderful comments.
    
    I would say that this movement is taking it to the streets to a certain extent. Look at the protest in front of the Capitol power plant last spring or the 350.org International Day of Climate Ation in October.
    
    We have to be careful not to wring our hands too much over the teabagger protests lately. Those, I think, have done far more good to the Democrats than the Republicans by showing the craziness that is a part of that side. Obama as Hitler? Regular people see that stuff and are repulsed.
    
    In order to work, protests have to be narrowly focused. If they are too broad, they bring out the fringe which the media will focus on.
    
    There are protests planned around the country today, 11/30, I believe, and candlelit vigils planned for 12/11 or 12/12. So, there are opportunities to get away from the computer screens.
    Permalink
  2. amazingdrx Posted 10:12 am
    30 Nov 2009
    I guess the crucial question is this: Is the wimpification due to an actual lack of progressive feeling within the culture or is it due to a massive takeover of the democratic party by reaganites? Or is it both?
    
    Look back at the 60s, McCarthy was rejected by the mainstream democratic party in favor of Humphrey. Hubert was progressive in words but in deeds he clove to the party line. Next came McGovern. He was progressive but was swiftboated right out of contention.
    
    Carter, like Obama now, was progressive but couldn't get anything done.
    
    If democrats turned to in-your-streets style progressivism would the party be marginalized again as the current leadership switched parties once again? I would hate to see a fractionalizing coup by progressives of local and state parties destroy this democratic majority, but what good is this faux majority doing us if we can't even pass fundamental healthcare reform?
    
    If even the simplest reforms are opposed and blocked by blue dogs, are we better off ejecting those who are under the control of corporatism? Should we organize and takeover party operations now coopted by (ex?) reaganites? I have noticed a trend here where local leaders either intentionally or through sheer negligence, tend to sabotage volunteer efforts.
    
    Volunteers tend to be committed progressives, but functionaries at local and state levels tend to view us with dissrespect and disdain, discouraging our efforts by insisting that we ignore discussion of issues or strategy and act like a sales team selling a generic product. We go over the same cold call lists and canvass the same diehard progrressive haters over and over every campaign with narry a culling for greater effectiveness.
    
    In fact, email blackouts are organized against progressives so we don't even find out about key fundraising events where one on one contact with candidates can happen. Those are reserved for chamber of commerce type (ex?) reaganites. Wrong driving directions were sent out at the last of these here, when I pointed it out the local party head and leader of that candidate's campaign in our area laughed and blamed it on headquarters, then made no effort to correct it.
    
    In my mind that comes very close to sabotage. We play fair and they play dirty politics, with their own volunteers.
    Permalink
Clifford Wells Posted 9:28 am
30 Nov 2009
I agree, a good crop of comments. Not very nutritious, but a good crop.

You know, mankind will take little steps and dance around as the world changes, doing little as possible and what is done is "a day late and a dollar short." Depressing? Well, we haven't really solved water pollution and air pollution either, and much of our lands are now toxic landfills.

But the truly impressive part is that we've come a long way since 1970, when the first environmental laws were enacted in the US. For many of us, it was "the right to work law" and hey, it paid good to reduce harmful pollution.

Gone are the days when we used to burn our garbage on the weekends, in huge smoldering fires. That's just not acceptable to most people anymore, a paradigm shift of sorts.

And I think that some day, that moment of change will happen with climate change and reducing greenhouse gases. It is starting to happen already. But like all changes, the opposition never goes down without a fight. I would rather see 500 children having a silent protest than one blow-hard right-winger pontificating at a town hall meeting. The silent movement will win.
Permalink
askantik Posted 12:48 pm
30 Nov 2009
NO!!!!!!!!!!!11

Climate change is pure BS, they said so on TV! Don't you know that sensationalist conservative "news" writers and political pundits know WAY more about climatology than, like, the climatologists!?

What is wrong with you? That you would believe the conspiracy set out by 99% of the climatologists and (and other relevant scientists) rather than the honest and intelligent ramblings of people who don't even bother with the conspiracy long enough to understand the fundamental principles of global warming or know that weather isn't the same as climate... You must stop being a sheep and listening to those evil scientists!

-----

Did I fool you for a second? I think it was a a pretty decent impression. I could have thrown in a few spelling errors or used the caps lock key for greater effect...
Permalink
ToddinNorway Posted 3:35 pm
30 Nov 2009
The road to reversing climate change really only starts at one place, and that is to shut down the coal industry. It can be done, using known and proven tactics that until now were blocked by political forces. This is the cause of many very dedicated and capable activists. Start by supporting them, they will win. They will need some help from commercial players that will develop the replacement for coal. They need your support as well. For the moment it looks like shale gas is the leading candidate in the northeast USA where coal is most entrenched and difficult to replace. It is not emission-free and it is not risk-free. But it does not require mountaintop removal, strip mining, valley fill, sludge dams or ash ponds or spew mercury, sulphur or particulates. As for all the coal in the midwest and south, these will easily be replaced by renewables very soon because they will be commercially very competitive due to rapid improvements in performance and rapidly falling prices and in fact competition in the market for supplying components and systems. Once it is clear that the almighty coal industry can be put down, other emissions impossible will be solved. Stand up, speak up and don´t give up.
Permalink
boz33 Posted 6:21 pm
30 Nov 2009
There is a lack of free thought in society plane and simple and with so much lobbying, counter arguments and corruption it hard to know what to trust or who to follow.

From the day you are born you are persuaded or guided a certain way. Not many individuals ever leave this system and think for themselves.

The real questions are: 1. What happens if we do something about it and it was nothing to worry about? (A) We got lucky and wasted some cash.
2. What happens if we do nothing and it is real? (A)We are screwed.
Point 1 sounds better to me.
Permalink
1. prohb Posted 8:23 am
  02 Dec 2009
  Actually, as to your first point, we wil gain with improved technologies. (Even John McCain agrees...and said so to me, face to face.!)
  Permalink