RealClimate: The legend of the Titanic
one may wonder what the point would be in having a debate about climate change, and why certain organisations would put so much efforts into denial, as described in books such as Heat is on, Climate Cover-up, Republican war on science, Merchants of doubt, and The Hockeystick and Climate Wars. Why then, would there be such things as ‘the Heartland Institute’, ‘NIPCC’, climateaudit, WUWT, climatedepot, and FoS, if they had no effect? And indeed, the IPCC reports and the reports from the National Academy of Sciences? One could even ask whether the effort that we have put into RealClimate has been in vain.
...What do I think? Public opinion is changed not by big events as such, but by the public interpretation of those events. Whether a major event like hurricane Katrina or the Moscow heat wave changes attitudes towards climate change is determined by people’s interpretation of this event, and whether they draw a connection to climate change – though not necessarily directly. I see this as a major reason why organisations such as the Heartland are fighting their PR battle by claiming that such events are all natural and have nothing to do with emissions.
The similarity between these organisations and the Titanic legend is that there was a widespread misconception that it could not sink (and hence it’s fame) and now organisations like the Heartland make dismissive claims about any connection between big events and climate change.
Posts
3 comments:
"The similarity between these organisations and the Titanic legend is that there was a widespread misconception that it could not sink (and hence it’s fame) and now organisations like the Heartland make dismissive claims about any connection between big events and climate change."
There wasn't any such misconception before the sinking - it grew afterwards and during the inquiries. RC being economical with the truth, and believing in misconceptions about misconceptions, as usual. It's Heartland's prerogative (and mine, and yours) to "make dismissive claims about any connection between big events and climate change." The burden of proof is upon those who make claims of any connection. Look no further than RC and their sycophants.
"it's fame" should have been "its fame" - no apostrophe, and never any apology from RC.
Indeed...
They discredit themselves by pointing at Katrina.
It was not the hurricane that caused the disaster, it was the flooding caused by typical Big Easy corruption - they spent the money for dykes on other things.
lemon
The Marcia X 3 was an excellent touch Tom. I'm quite sure they like a little cheese with their whine at RC. :-)
Post a Comment