SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
We Need to Save the Earth
Feb 26, 2010
Two months after Copenhagen, things on the global warming front are in a downward spiral.
At the summit meeting itself, nations failed to agree on binding commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions. And the resignation a few days ago of the main U.N. person dealing with climate change is yet another blow. Yvo de Boer departed mainly out of a feeling of despondency at the state of affairs, according to news reports.
Another top climate change official, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has come under withering fire and calls for resignation for errors in the panel's research and for the contracts he has secured in recent years for the Indian nonprofit he runs, The Energy Research Institute.
The fact that some errors crept into the IPCC's most recent report (issued in 2007) is embarrassing. And Pachauri should have been more careful about drumming up business for his organization. But to claim that such missteps prove that global warming constitutes a fraud is a hoot. As Pachauri told me when I interviewed him in December 2008: "Thousands of people are part of what some of these people say is a conspiracy? My God! This is a conspiracy on a scale that's absolutely astounding!"
Scientific organizations have come out with recent statements reaffirming that global warming is very much a reality.
"Over the last few months, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been attacked for minor errors in its sprawling 2007 report on climate change," says a Feb. 10 press release by the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Overall, the IPCC's conclusions remain indisputable: Climate change is happening now and human activity is causing it. Nations around the world will have to adapt to at least some climate change, including sea level rise, changes in precipitation, disruptions to agriculture, and species extinctions."
But minor scientific details haven't stopped climate change deniers from seizing the moment. Republican Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming has called for Pachauri's resignation and an independent panel to investigate his organization. And the Utah House earlier this month passed a resolution questioning global warming, as Terry Tempest Williams reveals in our coming issue.
Such know-nothings draw sustenance from a deep distrust of basic science in the United States, including on climate change.
"It is a skepticism that stands in contrast with prevailing views in Europe and has been linked to the influence of U.S. talk radio, the 'oil lobby,' an enduring love affair with cars, and a history founded on limiting the role of government," reports Reuters. "Science can be controversial in a country where evangelical Christians make up a quarter of the adult population. Many, for example, doubt the theory of evolution because they believe it contradicts the Bible."
So, only 43 percent of Americans believe that global warming is caused due to human activity, and only 44 percent believe it to be a "very serious problem" versus 90 percent of Brazilians, 68 percent of the French and 65 percent of the Japanese population. The result? Widespread opposition even to the inadequate climate change cap and trade bill still stuck in the Senate.
If only the threat facing us weren't so serious.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Amitabh Pal
Amitabh Pal teaches at Edgewood College in Madison, WI. Formerly, he was managing editor of The Progressive. He interviewed the Dalai Lama, Mikhail Gorbachev, Jimmy Carter and John Kenneth Galbraith for the magazine.
Two months after Copenhagen, things on the global warming front are in a downward spiral.
At the summit meeting itself, nations failed to agree on binding commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions. And the resignation a few days ago of the main U.N. person dealing with climate change is yet another blow. Yvo de Boer departed mainly out of a feeling of despondency at the state of affairs, according to news reports.
Another top climate change official, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has come under withering fire and calls for resignation for errors in the panel's research and for the contracts he has secured in recent years for the Indian nonprofit he runs, The Energy Research Institute.
The fact that some errors crept into the IPCC's most recent report (issued in 2007) is embarrassing. And Pachauri should have been more careful about drumming up business for his organization. But to claim that such missteps prove that global warming constitutes a fraud is a hoot. As Pachauri told me when I interviewed him in December 2008: "Thousands of people are part of what some of these people say is a conspiracy? My God! This is a conspiracy on a scale that's absolutely astounding!"
Scientific organizations have come out with recent statements reaffirming that global warming is very much a reality.
"Over the last few months, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been attacked for minor errors in its sprawling 2007 report on climate change," says a Feb. 10 press release by the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Overall, the IPCC's conclusions remain indisputable: Climate change is happening now and human activity is causing it. Nations around the world will have to adapt to at least some climate change, including sea level rise, changes in precipitation, disruptions to agriculture, and species extinctions."
But minor scientific details haven't stopped climate change deniers from seizing the moment. Republican Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming has called for Pachauri's resignation and an independent panel to investigate his organization. And the Utah House earlier this month passed a resolution questioning global warming, as Terry Tempest Williams reveals in our coming issue.
Such know-nothings draw sustenance from a deep distrust of basic science in the United States, including on climate change.
"It is a skepticism that stands in contrast with prevailing views in Europe and has been linked to the influence of U.S. talk radio, the 'oil lobby,' an enduring love affair with cars, and a history founded on limiting the role of government," reports Reuters. "Science can be controversial in a country where evangelical Christians make up a quarter of the adult population. Many, for example, doubt the theory of evolution because they believe it contradicts the Bible."
So, only 43 percent of Americans believe that global warming is caused due to human activity, and only 44 percent believe it to be a "very serious problem" versus 90 percent of Brazilians, 68 percent of the French and 65 percent of the Japanese population. The result? Widespread opposition even to the inadequate climate change cap and trade bill still stuck in the Senate.
If only the threat facing us weren't so serious.
Amitabh Pal
Amitabh Pal teaches at Edgewood College in Madison, WI. Formerly, he was managing editor of The Progressive. He interviewed the Dalai Lama, Mikhail Gorbachev, Jimmy Carter and John Kenneth Galbraith for the magazine.
Two months after Copenhagen, things on the global warming front are in a downward spiral.
At the summit meeting itself, nations failed to agree on binding commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions. And the resignation a few days ago of the main U.N. person dealing with climate change is yet another blow. Yvo de Boer departed mainly out of a feeling of despondency at the state of affairs, according to news reports.
Another top climate change official, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has come under withering fire and calls for resignation for errors in the panel's research and for the contracts he has secured in recent years for the Indian nonprofit he runs, The Energy Research Institute.
The fact that some errors crept into the IPCC's most recent report (issued in 2007) is embarrassing. And Pachauri should have been more careful about drumming up business for his organization. But to claim that such missteps prove that global warming constitutes a fraud is a hoot. As Pachauri told me when I interviewed him in December 2008: "Thousands of people are part of what some of these people say is a conspiracy? My God! This is a conspiracy on a scale that's absolutely astounding!"
Scientific organizations have come out with recent statements reaffirming that global warming is very much a reality.
"Over the last few months, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been attacked for minor errors in its sprawling 2007 report on climate change," says a Feb. 10 press release by the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Overall, the IPCC's conclusions remain indisputable: Climate change is happening now and human activity is causing it. Nations around the world will have to adapt to at least some climate change, including sea level rise, changes in precipitation, disruptions to agriculture, and species extinctions."
But minor scientific details haven't stopped climate change deniers from seizing the moment. Republican Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming has called for Pachauri's resignation and an independent panel to investigate his organization. And the Utah House earlier this month passed a resolution questioning global warming, as Terry Tempest Williams reveals in our coming issue.
Such know-nothings draw sustenance from a deep distrust of basic science in the United States, including on climate change.
"It is a skepticism that stands in contrast with prevailing views in Europe and has been linked to the influence of U.S. talk radio, the 'oil lobby,' an enduring love affair with cars, and a history founded on limiting the role of government," reports Reuters. "Science can be controversial in a country where evangelical Christians make up a quarter of the adult population. Many, for example, doubt the theory of evolution because they believe it contradicts the Bible."
So, only 43 percent of Americans believe that global warming is caused due to human activity, and only 44 percent believe it to be a "very serious problem" versus 90 percent of Brazilians, 68 percent of the French and 65 percent of the Japanese population. The result? Widespread opposition even to the inadequate climate change cap and trade bill still stuck in the Senate.
If only the threat facing us weren't so serious.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.