It is hard to escape the conclusion that the US Congress has entered the intellectual wilderness, a sad state of affairs in a country that has led the world in many scientific arenas for so long. Global warming is a thorny problem, and disagreement about how to deal with it is understandable. It is not always clear how to interpret data or address legitimate questions. Nor is the scientific process, or any given scientist, perfect. But to deny that there is reason to be concerned, given the decades of work by countless scientists, is irresponsible.
That’s from a strong editorial in the journal Nature, “Into ignorance” (subs. req’d). Here’s more:
As Nature went to press, a committee of the US Congress was poised to pass legislation that would overturn a scientific finding on the dangers of global warming. The Republican-sponsored bill is intended to prevent the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse-gas emissions, which the agency declared a threat to public welfare in 2009. That assessment serves as the EPA’s legal basis for regulation, so repealing the ‘endangerment finding’ would eliminate its authority over greenhouse gases.
That this finding is scientifically sound had no bearing on the decision to push the legislation, and Republicans on the House of Representatives’ energy and commerce committee have made clear their disdain for climate science. At a subcommittee hearing on 14 March, anger and distrust were directed at scientists and respected scientific societies. Misinformation was presented as fact, truth was twisted and nobody showed any inclination to listen to scientists, let alone learn from them. It has been an embarrassing display, not just for the Republican Party but also for Congress and the US citizens it represents.
It is tempting to write all of this off as petty partisanship, a populist knee-jerk reaction to lost jobs and rising energy prices by a well-organized minority of Republican voters. After all, US polling data has consistently shown that, in general, the public accepts climate science….
… the legislation is fundamentally anti-science, just as the rhetoric that supports it is grounded in wilful ignorance. One lawmaker last week described scientists as “elitist” and “arrogant” creatures who hide behind “discredited” institutions. Another propagated the myth that in the 1970s the scientific community warned of an imminent ice age. Melting ice caps on Mars served to counter evidence of anthropogenic warming on Earth, and Antarctica was falsely said to be gaining ice. Several scientists were on hand “” at the behest of Democrats on the subcommittee “” to answer questions and clear things up, but many lawmakers weren’t interested in answers, only in prejudice….
That this legislation is unlikely to become law doesn’t make it any less dangerous. It is the attitude and ideas behind the bill that are troublesome, and they seem to be spreading. Fred Upton, the Michigan Republican who chairs the full energy and commerce committee, once endorsed climate science, but last month said “” after being pinned down by a determined journalist “” that he is not convinced that greenhouse-gas emissions contribute to global warming. It was yet another blow to the shrinking minority of moderate centrists in both parties.
One can only assume that Congress will find its way at some point, pressured by voters who expect more from their public servants. In the meantime, as long as it can fend off this and other attacks on the EPA, President Barack Obama’s administration should push forward with its entirely reasonable regulatory programme for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions where it can, while looking for ways to work with Congress in other areas. Rising oil prices should increase interest in energy security, a co-benefit of the greenhouse-gas and fuel-efficiency standards for vehicles that were announced by the administration last year. The same advice applies to the rest of the world. Work with the United States where possible, but don’t wait for a sudden change of tenor in Washington DC.
One of the scientists testifying before Whitfield’s subcommittee was Christopher Field, director of the Carnegie Institution’s global ecology department in Stanford, California. Field generously hoped that his testimony at last week’s hearing took place “in the spirit of a genuine dialogue that is in the best interests of the country”. Maybe one day that hope will be justified.
Maybe one day, but not one day soon.
Related Posts:
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
Abysmal. Entirely predictable, but still abysmal.
I predict that by the time the 2012 Elections roll around, the U.S. ecomony and financial markets will be in such an unprecedented mess (mostly because of peak oil) that these bozos will be sent packing like they won’t know what hit them.
Great!Many interesting….
Great article, but then I read the comments and groan all over again.
You’d think Nature would have more of a well-informed audience, but there’s the same memes popping up like it’s a Fox News message board or something…
“Why doesn’t anyone mention the polar ice caps on Mars melting?”
“If global warming’s real how come I don’t notice the sea levels rising?”
Urgggh. The Rethuglicans are plunging “into ignorance” because they know they have a lot of public support and shelter there. Polls may show opinions still strong for AGW, but the sad fact is ignorance and Dunning-Krugerism are contagious, otherwise the public consensus would match the scientific one.
Ignorance is not only contagious, but in this day and age of the internet it is also quite viral.
I really wish it was as simple as settling the science – but climate hawks, as well as all of us who simply understand the current paradigm is completely unsustainable (both economically and environmentally), face an unfathomable mountain of greed, corruption, apathy, self-involvement, and downright unbridled stupidity in the years ahead.
This is likely going to get MUCH worse before it gets better.
The US is exceptional in every way. Plus, we don’t like elitists…
Sigh.
Bob, I sincerely hope that USA folks will understand that the GOP anti-science stance is a threat and is partly responsible for this mess, but I was raised by people with an infinite capacity for self deception. I fear that the dittoheads among us will just blame the atheist/Muslim, fascist/liberal elitists.
They don’t like change, especially if it’s painful and complicated, but they have trusted authorities who will provide them with simple explanations.
These corporate-backed legislators are not conservatives. They are radicals, or neocon radicals, of an ascendant corporate-fascist campaign by wealthy mining owners, and associated business dependents like investment banks, that supports combustion and fission status-quo, political capture, wealth by public subsidy and ecocidal behavior. Their corrupt paradigm is becoming increasingly exposed and they are a threat to national security of a rot-from-within kind.
Call them fossil-fission corporatists or mouthpieces for chambers of combustion, but please don’t call them upholders of the principles of the founding of America. Government by campaign wealth and associated paid lobbying is minimally a Plutocracy. (Pluto: god of the underworld, god of centralized money, and nothing centralizes the political power of money better than oil, except perhaps, transfers out of a public treasury or from a central bank)
Apparently no subscription is required to read this particular item in Nature.
Mysteriously, the GOP’s faith in science and technology remains intact on issues such as nuclear power, computers, medicine and weapons procurement. Or, not so mysteriously.
They don’t go proclaiming that demons captured by sorcerers are operating the internet. They seem to have exaggerated faith in the ability of nuclear power plants to retain their radioactive materials despite repeated failures. Any data gathering (radar, satellite, infrared) system is to be implicitly trusted as long as it’s connected to a targeting system for a weapon instead of an ice pack measuring device.
In short, they’re lying weasels and they know it.
The GOP pretends ignorance on Climate Change because prominent “campaign contributors” (read bribes) make profits off the status quo. Any, semi-realistic, Climate Change abatement plan would impinge upon those profits.
#8. Pangolin has hit the nail on the head.
“It was yet another blow to the shrinking minority of moderate centrists in both parties.”
That is some seriously lazy political analysis. The two most consequential pieces of legislation (health care reform and cap and trade) taken up by Congress in the last legislative session were rooted in ideas first proposed by Republicans. Much of what Democrats passed of health care reform was modeled on the work of Massachusets and signed into law by Mitt Romney. And let’s not forget that the individual mandate was developed by scholars at the Heritage Foundation (not exactly a bastion of liberalism). Then there is cap and trade which was enacted under George Bush I to tackle sulfur dioxide emissions.
The Nature editorial board does a fine job of exposing the Republicans most blatant war on climate science to date but they shouldn’t promote the lazy Beltway group think that both parties are becoming more polarized. It is Republicans who are leading us off the cliff of movement conservatism and unfortunately Democrats seem to be getting slowly dragged towards that same precipice.
A sad situation indeed! It’s becoming more and more embarrassing to have these people as “leaders!”
Even sadder, they’ve often, as far as we can see, been bought for what is peanuts to the Koch brothers.
Most sadly, Obama could clear things up in one good “State of the Climate” speech, but remains quiet.
Good bye, cruel world.
It’s been real…
Roger
Over
and
out
..
.
I can’t agree with the ‘intellectual wilderness’ phrase as it denigrates wilderness. Think badgers!
Welcome to.. EXXON States of America…things go better with KOCH
This anti-science nonsense is not confined to the Congress. Here is the latest from the Lone Star State legislature. HB 2454 put forth by Republican State Rep Bill Zedler. Texas does not ban workplace discrimination based on gender identity, sexual orientation or martial status, but our friend Zedler has the solution. Here the key part:
‘An institution of higher education may not discriminate against or penalize in any manner, especially with regard to employment or academic support, a faculty member or student based on the faculty member’s or student’s conduct of research relating to the theory of intelligent design or other alternate theories of the orgination and development of organisms.’
I’m stunned that this kind of nonsense is still being slipped into the legal and educational portions of society. The issue has been settled in court several times and by the supreme court. No creationism in schools, but this fool must have missed the memo.
I have a strong desire to see some few of my Republican brethren barged to Brazil for a full scale reenactment of TR’s Amazon Expeditio . Those larger than the average ward heeler can play the roles of the big game he shot.
History…repeat…repeat…repeat….
Kaboom…planet!
I agree with the tenor of Pangolin #8. The denialists are Rightwing ideologues, hence psychopaths. They act in this manner because they can, because they enjoy the power to dominate others, especially those better than themselves ie smarter, better informed, more humane. Somewhere deep in the psyche of every psychopath a little kernel of self-awareness tells them that they are nasty pieces of work, and that knowledge torments them. Perversely it also drives them to greater depredations against the rest of humanity, as revenge. Exploiting other peoples’ labour, raping the earth of its resources, destroying forests, pillaging the oceans, all these and more besides give the capitalist psychopath (pardon the tautology) a sense of self-aggrandisement that anaesthetises him to the hideous reality of what he really is, what he has become and what he represents, which, of course, is the triumph of the death instinct. A lifetime of destroying everything living to turn it into that deadest of all dead things, money, can have no other apotheosis than the destruction of the life of humanity itself, and that, plainly, is what the Rightist zealots are seeking. You can see it in their utter determination and fanaticism.
You sure have some crazies over there!
Someone on the Guardian has posted a link to a recent transcript of a Limbaugh show:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201103150020
I refuse to stain the pages of CP with the sick bilge that this man utters. To shortcut to the bit that doubled my blood-pressure instantly, just Ctrl+F “tsunami” and read the whole paragraph containing the word (Warning – industrial-strength head-vise ESSENTIAL).
Otherwise, Pangolin (#8) nails it fair and square.
Cheers – John
Yes, it’s a strong editorial, but it refused to hammer the point that the denial of climate science is overwhelmingly a Republican problem. The article repeatedly blames “Congress”, not the Republicans specifically.
Tony,
That’s not entirely true. The editorial states: “Republicans on the House of Representatives’ energy and commerce committee have made clear their disdain for climate science.”
I agree that the wording could have been stronger, but I think they made their point.
Don’t you think that the congressmen & women who voted for the proposition may conceive that they have a responsibility to ensure that the people they represent have access to reliable power at reasonable prices? Especially since so many may be unemployed or in low paying jobs.
I live in Ontario, and electricity rates here are rising fast, mainly because of the provincial (Liberal) governments dash for wind. This is beginning to trouble me, and I am a well paid engineer (aerospace, since you didn’t ask)
The same thing is happening in the UK, only worse. The idiot Huhne (Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change) is also going for wind, when it’s been demonstrated, this winter, to be ineffective when it’s needed. And experience with wind (and solar)in other European countries is similar. Huhne studied Politics, Philosophy and Economics, he’s not an engineer, but in my opinion someone in his position should be; decisions on what power sources to be used should be taken on engineering criteria, which include cost and not (in this case) green ideology. I keep thinking – he can’t be that stupid, he went to the same university I did.
(Take a deep breath) – to keep the lights on in the near term, it looks like fossil fuels and nuclear are the only options. I would not like to be a politician responsible when power supplies begin to crash, as they did in Texas, and may in the UK in the near future, on a regular basis.
The deprivation of the populace from essential necessities is what drives revolutions – think France 1789.
palantir (#22), you are kidding right?
on pricing, the data shows the average price in Ontario is around 12c/kWh. Did you know people in Houston, Texas (yes that Texas) pay over 18c…and in SF, NYC and Boston pay over 25c? Italians pay 31c and Denmark averages 40c. Californians, with an economy the size of Canada, pay over 30c for top tier rates. In fact most nations of the world have much higher per kWh pricing than Ontario does. Somehow the quality of life continues.
The reality shown over and over again is that cheap energy prices per unit of energy lead to energy wasting and higher energy bills. That is because buying efficient infrastructure isn’t cost effective.
As far a Nuclear keeping the lights on, hmmm, how is that going in Japan these days? And a recent study out of a Canadian university just showed that USA could produce far more electricity via solar if it spent the exact same amount of money it does subsidizing nuclear plants and instead used it as loan guarantees for solar installations. Trillions more in energy…same investment. That is without counting nuke disasters or paying to put the waste somewhere.
And fossil fuels might keep your lights on…but it is also snuffing out the lights for millions of climate refuges elsewhere. And you are paying a lot in hidden fossil fuel subsidies you probably don’t even realize.
The politicians are voting for fossil and nuclear because they are backed by powerful interests that have the money and time to lobby hard.
Unfortunately, republicans are not only anti-science, but as the title of the Nature editorial correctly states they are pro-ignorance. What you don’t know, can’t hurt them.
Well said, Nature!
Barry @ #23
Do you have a link to that report – I’d like to read it. I’m guessing you’re in the U.S. where there’s a lot of room, (deserts) and a lot of reliable sunny weather. for large scale solar, though I read in some locations green groups are opposing even those.
This isn’t possible in the U.K. – there’s not a lot of room for that kind of thing, plus, Spain is pulling the plug on solar because they realise that subsidising the feed in tariffs was going to bankrupt the country, because the technology is not mature enough to compete.
OK, hydro’s cheaper in Ontario, but I use it for heating, as do many Canadians, so our usage is probably greater. It’s cheaper in comparison, but not so many years ago I was paying 7c/kWhr. However, compared to the U.S. I pay heavier taxes, and gas is more expensive – certain amount of relativity here. And I sure as hell don’t waste energy, my house is heavily insulated, as you might imagine.
In my experience, businesses and shops waste energy more than the individual consumer; have you ever walked into your local hardware store and seen how many of the display light fittings have lights burning in them?
Fukushima was hit by one of the largest earthquakes in history, then had its emergency generators knocked out by the tsunami; hardly an everyday event in the life of a nuclear power station. It’s a serious incident & situation but there’s a lot of hysteria being generated about it. You’ll notice I said – “in the near term”
I think generalising about the Republican representatives’ motives, (your last sentence), is a bit too sweeping. Like I said, they may conceive they have a responsibility to their constituents. Also, we live in democracies; if you offer the people what they want, power at a reasonable price in this case, they will vote for you.
I think power from renewables is a great idea, but it has to be tailored specifically to the country and society; the U.K. could make great use of tidal energy, but to the best of my knowledge very little is spent on its development, and the Severn tidal barrage, which has been talked about for aound 50 years, has been set aside yet again.
What I was trying to say, is that there’s a political element to all this – if you push people too far too fast, there’ll be a backlash – you could wind up with a completely Republican establishment, or something much more unpleasant
In a strange sort of way, I am thrilled by the GOP’s action.
The GOP and their talking head pundits rely on such outrageous lies, not to mention assaulting math and science (while embracing it on other issues like smoking, nuclear power, etc).
This gives the dems an opportunity, if they don’t squander it.
Its time to change the domestic debate through a coordinated effort. The dems have to saturate their domestic airwaves with the words “lie” and “betraying our tradition of math and science” and they have to drive into the publics head that the public has been hornswaggled by the lying bastards. The target is not the liberal base. The target is the swing voter, and the message must be: don’t trust me. Instead compare the voices on both sides, and then you decide for yourselves who is telling the truth. The public is plenty smart enough, they just have to be inspired to care enough to take in info and think about it.
That’s only gonna happen if the message is uniform and consistent through the democratic party apparatus. The obvious resistance to this is “My voters only care about jobs”. If the entire party machine tells their voters there soon won’t be food to buy even if you do have jobs, and clean tech will produce a lot of new industries” then we can move forward.
In sum: The antidote to a party that is willing to get power by telling any lie is by being civil, but harsh, with the truth and trusting the people to be smart enough to figure it out – (((IF))) you can get them to care enough to try. Uniform and consistent and nonstop message about what the GOP just did and what it means for my toddler in 2050 …. that’s the dem’s best chance for 2012.
So in my view, the GOP just gave us a gift. If we use it.