Citing The Existence Of Snow, Right-Wingers Delcare Climate Change Bogus

Doh! A polar bear reacts to Sean Hannity’s suggestion that the occurrence of snowstorms calls climate change into question.

Let me begin this post by saying that I am not at all qualified to speak in depth about climate change. Any person who wishes to investigate this matter will find an abundance of online resources from renowned climatologists and scientific academies that comprise the “climate change is real” consensus. What I would like to discuss here is the startling ignorance and gleeful anti-science sentiment displayed by some of the nation’s most visible conservatives.

Sean Hannity, whose highest degree is a high school diploma, presents himself as an expert on a whole variety of issues. The confidence with which he speaks on these topics serves primarily to mask the plain fact that his understanding of the problems of the day consist of predictable platitudes and right-wing talking points. One of the issues on which Hannity is an “expert” is climate change, as evidenced by his reasoning that because the eastern United States has recently experienced a slew of snowstorms, climate change is therefore a fake. “Global warming, where are you? We want you back,” was his ludicrous reaction. Glenn Beck, who also has no college degree, showed similar skepticism on his radio program by suggesting that climatologists commit mass suicide. And many Republican congresspersons, such as Jim Inhofe (R – Oklahoma) have made statements ranging from suspicious to outright disbelieving on the entire phenomenon.

The idea that because the month of February has brought snowstorms and cold weather to the eastern seaboard, this somehow imperils the science supporting climate change, is so stupid, so profoundly idiotic, that one wonders if the people who say such things are being serious. I am aware of no climate change theory that posits there will be no snowstorms or cold weather from here on in. Unfortunately in some circles, the science of climatology is as simple as looking out one’s window in order to gauge the feasibility of climate change. But fear not, my fellow climate change believers; summer is right around the corner. And if we use the skeptics’ own methodology, we should have no problem demonstrating an empirically verifiable warming trend starting very soon. That should buy us some time, at least until October.

These types of criticisms of climate change are quite curious. Hannity, Beck, et al. do not dare discuss or debate the actual science with reputable scientists who have researched and analyzed this problem because they would surely be exposed for the frauds they are. Listening to people like these rail against climate change, one gets the impression that they believe the whole thing is a hoax perpetrated by an agenda-minded global scientific community. But cui bono? Whom does worldwide acceptance of global warming benefit? If climate change is real, it would seem to be a giant inconvenience to most everyone on the planet. Governments, businesses, individuals, everyone. It has been suggested that climate change is being pushed by the green industry, but this is an insane assertion when we consider the relative power of the non-green heavy-hitting lobbyists from oil companies, the auto industry, and other sectors who wish to see a status quo approach to climate change. The last time I checked, “Big Solar” does not occur in the Washington lobbying vernacular. And if you think climate change is simply a scheme to make money for Al Gore, please check yourself into the nearest emergency room and tell the receptionist that you require an immediate psychological evaluation.

It isn’t so much the skepticism of such individuals that irritates me. Rather, in denouncing climate change as a hoax and citing the recent snowstorms, people such as Hannity and Beck assume a rather giddy tone. It is as if they truly enjoy ridiculing the scientific professions. We saw the same thing a few years ago when theocrackpots were at their most vocal and obnoxious in attempting to insert creationist hogwash into the science curricula in public schools. President Bush himself supported the idea “so people can understand what the debate is about.” Of course, there is no debate—not a serious one, anyway—involving Darwinian evolution and creationism, or intelligent design, or whatever else the religionists want to call this horseshit hypothesis. When scientists—specifically biologists—across the country condemned this uninformed statement, the theocrackpots reverted to the standard line about the scientific community and its own problems with dogmatism. However, the only dogmatism involved in science is the unchanging adherence to the scientific method, which demands a staunch commitment to evidence, logic, and truth-seeking, even if it means drawing a conclusion that is unexpected or unwelcome. Scientists are in fact “dogmatic” in this sense, in that they are beholden to reality. Living such a life is not always convenient, but it is generally free of the delusional wishful thinking that often plagues the reasoning of so many people.

It’s funny. We’re constantly hearing fiscally prudent Americans denounce the massive debt their country has accumulated, because they say they don’t want their children and grandchildren to be saddled with that burden. But when it comes to climate change, the kids are on their own, which just goes to show that “The Children” talk is merely pious rhetoric masking a self-centered, I-don’t-give-a-flying-fuck worldview. It’s only the planet we’re talking about—the only humanly inhabitable piece of real estate in the known universe. And yet, there are some who would have us believe that the rapidly growing population of humans can burn increasing amounts of fossil fuels on a planet with an atmosphere that retains a good amount of heat, without any repercussions whatsoever. Indeed, in the Republican rebuttal to President Obama’s State of the Union speech last month, Virginia Governor Bob O’Donnell declared, “We are blessed here in America with vast natural resources, and we must use them all.”

Use them all? Really? All of them? Sadly that is the attitude of many citizens in this zombie consumer horror show we call America. People rarely think beyond what’s right in front of them at the time, let alone worry about the state of America and the world fifty or one hundred years from now.

- Max Canning