THE CLIMATE CHANGE TEST
Three years have passed since the American Media and the advertising gurus on Madison Avenue began to push “Global Warming” into the spotlight; if “green” hasn’t become the most overused word in the English language (next to Obama), I am at a loss as to what it might be. Call me cynical, but certainly the economic component of the issue, ie, “how can we make money from this ‘crisis,’” contributes significantly to its recent notoriety.
But how many of us truly believe in global warming and, perhaps more significantly, how dire do we really believe the threat to be?
A recent Gallup poll provided some startling results. In 2006, almost 40% of those polled believed the media was underestimating the seriousness of climate change. Now, more than 40% believe the media is exaggerating the issue. All the publicity and the hype have created a global warming backlash.
In February, a Pew Research poll revealed that Americans place global warming on the very last wrung of their Top 20 priorities. A year ago 71% of all Americans believed in Global Warming; now only 57% are worried.
What do YOU believe? It really isn’t a YES or NO debate; instead it’s: YES…NO..or YES, BUT. Take the test and find out where you stand on the future of the planet….
#1…DO YOU BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING?
Many reject it completely. They believe the recent weather fluctuations are a natural part of earth’s cycle. Many more believe some kind of seminal change is underway.
#2…IF YOU DO BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING, DO YOU BELIEVE IT IS RELATED TO THE ACTIVITIES OF MAN?
There is a body of thought that agrees change is afoot, even dramatic shifts in the earth’s climate, but they maintain that it is a natural change, brought on perhaps by fluctuations in the sun’s intensity (sunspot activity, for example), or by the natural rhythms of the earth itself. The majority of us believe that we are the significant contributing factor.
#3…IF YOU DO BELIEVE HUMANS ARE RESPONSIBLE, HOW DIRE DO YOU BELIEVE THE THREAT IS?
There are brilliant scientists among us who believe we stand at the very brink of disaster. James Hansen, the NASA climatologist, fears we are at the “tipping point.” Nothing less than draconian measures can reverse what he fears will be “eco-system collapse” and “mass extinction.” Recently Hansen said, “Those who lead us have no excuse – they are elected to guide, to protect the public and its best interests….Our planet is in peril. If we do not change course, we’ll hand our children a situation that is out of their control. One ecological collapse will lead to another, in amplifying feedbacks.
Other “experts’ believe global warming will be manageable and will even bring with it certain economic benefits.
#4…IF YOU THINK THE SITUATION IS DIRE—THAT WE STAND AT THE ‘TIPPING POINT”—DO YOU BELIEVE THAT ALTERNATE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT & NEW TECHNOLOGIES CAN REVERSE THIS? OR DO YOU BELIEVE WE MUST MAKE MAJOR CHANGES—SIGNIFICANT SACRIFICES— IN OUR LIVES TO SAVE THE EARTH?
This is the critical question. This is what separates the wheat from the chaff. Do you think green technology and more efficient vehicles and alternative energy like wind turbines and solar arrays will save us from destruction?
That is the philosophy and policy (though not always enunciated) of mainstream environmentalism, including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) who said recently, “Reducing global warming pollution will have an imperceptible effect on economic output….We can stave off the biggest environmental and humanitarian crisis without disrupting economic growth.” NRDC, in fact, believes we can expand the economy and fix the environment simultaneously.
So do most mainstream environmental groups. Why?
All of these groups must believe that technology and the free market system will save the earth without any sacrifice at all, simply because they are funded and in many cases their boards of directors are dominated by America’s most successful capitalists—men and women, entrepreneurs all— worth hundreds of millions, even billions of dollars, whose core beliefs REQUIRE an ever-expanding free-market economy.
Consider The Wilderness Society (TWS), one of the largest and most influential green groups in the U.S. Its governing board includes David Bonderman, the private equity guru of TPG who recently acquired TXU utilities and is building one of the dirtiest coal-fired power plants in America. TPG also has major investments in Las Vegas, but we don’t see anyone dimming the lights. Of the six other board members, Brenda Davis is a vice president with Johnson & Johnson. Caroline Getty is an heir to the Getty fortune. Scott Nathan is the managing director of the Baupost Group, a Boston-based investment firm with a $4 billion portfolio. Doug Walker is the board chairman of Recreational Equipment, Inc (REI), one of the largest outdoor equipment and clothing companies in the United States, and Hansjorg Wyss is one of the richest persons on the planet; his estimated worth is just under $6 billion
Even smaller regional groups, here on the Colorado Plateau, like the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, the Grand Canyon Trust, Red Rock Forests in Moab, Utah, and even Great Old Broads for Wilderness are tapped into the wealthy benefactor pipeline.
All of these groups must believe that technology and the free market system will save the earth without any sacrifice at all, simply because they are funded and in many cases their boards of directors are dominated by America’s most successful capitalists—men and women, entrepreneurs all— worth hundreds of millions, even billions of dollars, whose core beliefs REQUIRE an ever-expanding free-market economy.
.
In most cases, the conservation movement throws down the gauntlet daily against the exploitation of our lands for the production of commodities. But it rarely raises a finger to object to the consumption of those commodities. And admitting that humans cannot sustain this gluttonous and ultimately disastrous Culture of Consumption is our only hope.
If you think that buying a Prius and using re-usable “green” grocery bags and building 100,000 wind mills can actually save us, then you can move forward with a clear conscience,. But it is a lie. We are deluding ourselves and our “environmental leaders” are the most deluded of them all.If you see the absurdity in that premise, then it is time at last, to say it out loud.
As Abbey once said, “What we need is something entirely different.”
That “something different” is the Truth.
