Who cares if climate change is a hoax?

I’ve recently seen a bunch of chatter on Facebook and on the blogosphere about how climate change is just a hoax, a massive conspiracy within the scientific community. There is a variety of evidence out there that proponents of this idea use, but the specifics on that are irrelevant to the inevitable conclusion that I reach: so what?

Regular readers know that I’m not a fan of conspiracy theories, because usually all you need is a third grade reading level and common sense to poke holes in them. In this case, I’d have to ask what the motivation is? Is it for prestige? I doubt it, since the majority of the scientific community seems to be on the same page, and I’m sure that the average person couldn’t name one climate scientist. Well then it must be money! Money is the root of all evil, after all, right? Surely, this hoax is for financial gain. Well, I don’t really know how scientists would profit from climate change. Maybe they get more money for their research, but that’s not exactly going to buy them an island in the Caribbean.

Surely, then, it must be those evil renewable energy and green companies! They’re feeding the flames of misinformation and funding this all in order to drive fossil fuels out of business so that we must all rely upon them! To which I say, good. I like renewable energy. Relying upon fossil fuels is stupid for a variety of reasons. For one, it’s really stupid to base our entire economy and our way of living on a finite resource. I’m sure there are conflicting reports about exactly how much oil is left and how long it will take us to use it all, but there’s one common thread: it will eventually run out. Who cares if it’s 50 years from now or 500? Sooner or later it will be gone, and without alternative and renewable sources of energy, we’re screwed. And very short sighted people will continually refuse to innovate and invest for that event because they’re slaves to a market that tells them it’s cheaper not to presently. 

Not to mention the environmental impact. And no, I’m not just talking about CO2. Although I’ve never really been sure why people believe that it’s no big deal to pump millions of metric tons of a substance our body actively tries to get rid of into the air…for us to breathe all over again. I’m sick of oil spill disasters. I’m sick of polluting and destroying the water table with fracking. I’m sick of destroying pristine places with drilling. Just look at what happened to West Virginia’s water supply thanks to the coal industry.

Every single one of those problems can be avoided with alternative and renewable energy. Solar power won’t kill the ocean. Wind turbines won’t pollute the water supply or destroy the water table. Hydrogen won’t spew CO2 into the air for all of us to breathe. We aren’t going to run out of sunlight or wind for billions of years. The same goes for geothermal power. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.

Inevitably I have to ask who cares if climate change is a hoax? What’s the worst case scenario? We stop destroying the environment? We develop sustainable forms of energy for the indefinite future that are much safer? We, heaven forbid, develop something cheaper or more efficient? The oil companies disappear?? Are any of those things really bad or evil? Would any of those things negatively impact your quality of life? Of course not. Hoax or not, the changes that climate change begs are beneficial to mankind. All of the changes suggested by climate change are positive ones, not negative ones. So I ask again: who cares whether or not it’s a hoax, if it’s man-made, or even if it’s real?


11 thoughts on “Who cares if climate change is a hoax?

  1. The people who are making hoax claims know better, they just want to keep raping the planet until every last possible dollars worth of resources has been harvested. To hell with the planet, the people who live on it, and the dire implications of their actions. This is about as crazy as crazy gets.

    I do though, care that the hoax claims are so abundant, and that a large percentage of people buy into all of the conspiracy B.S. Facts are facts, the planet is warming. The c02 we are dumping into the atmosphere is a primary cause. What is it about these 2 claims of fact that is so hard to believe? Only those who are already brainwashed into believing everything their authority figures tell them (which happens to correlate with the ultra religious nicely) fall in line with the conspiracy theory talking heads. The rest of us are shaking our heads wondering how it ever got this bad to start with, or just don’t have time to care.

    Climate conspiracy claims are driven by greed. Pure and simple. The facts speak for themselves. The spinsters keep spinning, the rubes keep their heads buried in the sand, and the rest of us appear to be along for the ride. If the damn x-tians think hell is hot, wait till earth becomes Venus.

    I agree that renewable resources should be a primary focus, as well as geo thermal and hydrogen fuel cell tech. The oil industry and every industry tied to it has everything to lose, Only those working in renewable have anything to gain. Until the quest for profit is overtaken by the desire to take care of our planet, will we be able to dig ourselves out of this hole. Doesn’t look good from where I am sitting.

    1. Very well put. I think you’re right on the money (no pun intended), and you’ve highlighted the reason why I don’t really care much for capitalism or conservative politics: both tend view people as dollar signs, or more often than not outright place money above people.

      1. Please go back and read the second paragraph of my post until that sinks in.

        Emotionally charged? Could not be further from the truth. I am about as far away from emotionally charged as you might be from understanding science.

        You come off like a right wing conservative fundamentalist moron, dominonist. “The planet is here and we can do whatever we want, our dog will make sure we are fine…”

        There may have been some data manipulation here or there, but the overwhelming majority of scientific data support the fact that the planet is warming and c02 a likely cause. I don’t know where you get your information but I strongly suspect AIG, Fox News or the DI. That speaks volumes about you.

        The one thing I can agree with is the fact that while knowing the dangers of c02 many people blissfully go about their lives as if it doesn’t apply to them. That is a shame. What I don’t get is why that is any kind of argument at all? How does the fact that wastefulness by the oblivious become a justification to continue the process?

        Get yourself an education. There are many learning opportunities on the internet. There is more to the world around you than what your preacher is telling you, or what is written in that little black book of yours. I’d tell you to get a clue, but then you would probably tune in to Blues Clues.

        Don’t expect any more replies from me sir, I know where and how this ends. It ends now. There is no positive outcome from lowering ones self to someone else’s level of ignorance.

    2. Shelldigger, you couldn’t be further from the truth. We who don’t fall for this hoax don’t reject it because we want to keep “raping” the planet until it’s been depleted of resources. That’s a liberal talking point meant to demonize their opponents and keep believers like you in line. The fact that you’re coming across as so emotionally charged demonstrates that perfectly.

      We reasonable people care about the planet, but we care about people more. And the fact is that we have nothing to be alarmed about. Why is that so hard to accept? Fraudulent reports have been discovered showing how and why scientists perpetuated their myths, yet you won’t admit it regardless of the evidence. If the polar ice caps are melting, it’s due to man-made global warming. If there’s more polar ice than ever before, it’s because of man-made global warming. Please get serious. You can’t have it both ways. When your predictions fail, it’s probably time to abandon the theory.

      Global warming theorists are the ones driven by greed. Pure and simple. The facts speak for themselves. I think Al Gore does more to “rape and pillage” the environment than anyone I know besides Obama. If they really believed a shred if this crap they’d be riding bikes everywhere they go, or do teleconferences so that they wouldn’t have to travel and create a bigger carbon footprint. They’re the biggest hypocrites. They don’t practice what they preach, and it’s obvious they don’t take it seriously enough to alter their lifestyles. So why should the rest of us? Plus they’re making a fortune from it. Just imagine how they’ll profit from more laws and regulations. And what good will those laws and regulations do? Will it stop earth from becoming Venus? Or is it too late already? Stop the doom and gloom. We’re not buying it. You should be happy that the global warming prophets have been wrong. Or are you hoping they’re right so that there’s an excuse to grow the size of government control our lives? Good grief. It’s hard to take you seriously.

      Personally I don’t see any good coming from this global warming nonsense. It’s only intended to make our lives harder, and it will hurt a lot of humans. I think there’s a greater risk of government harming humans than for humans harming the environment.

      Lastly, God has given us natural resources so that we could use them. He didn’t make the natural resources to be hoarded by mother earth. We should simply be good stewards of these natural resources.

      1. I really don’t see how alternative or renewable energy makes our lives harder. Could you perhaps provide some examples of that?

        Also, I feel compelled to mention that without the planet, there is no human race. So forgive me if I view the planet itself as our most precious resource.

        I’m really not sure how you see the scientists financially gaining from this. As the scientist on this thread pointed out, who has the most to gain by perpetuating the hoax idea? Oil companies, obviously, who get to keep drilling and raking in billions of dollars a year. I’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts that most “scientific” evidence that global warming isn’t real or is a hoax has some funding coming from oil companies.

      2. The problem with alternative energy sources is that they’re more costly, expensive and aren’t as effective. If battery powered cars were so good, then why doesn’t everybody buy one? The answer is because they’re too expensive to buy and maintain, and they don’t perform as well. Californians are having “battery charge rage” (as opposed to road rage) because people are fighting over battery charging spots. If solar energy is so great, then why did Solindra have to receive grants when all the reasonable people knew they were going to fail?

        Oil is an inexpensive and effective supply of natural energy.

        All energy sources have their own set of problems. Some may cause less environmental harm or harm to humans, but they may pose other problems and may not be able to keep up with demand or live up to their promises. Hydro-electricity can cause very high greenhouse emissions, geothermal can cause groundwater pollution by chemicals and requires a significant transmission infrastructure, wind farms kill a lot of birds and cause noise pollution, etc.

        Of course if we don’t have a human race if we don’t have a planet. But the planet isn’t going anywhere, and I don’t know why you think it won’t be around much longer. As a Christian I know that the earth won’t be destroyed until after the rapture (2 Peter 3:10). There’s no reason to panic, unless Jesus comes within our lifetime.

        Scientists benefit financially by getting their work financed. If they don’t receive grants and such, they’re out of a job. And if you don’t think scientists gain financially, then how could you suggest that scientists working for oil companies are the bad guys? Obviously you do think scientists can be persuaded by outside influences, which supports my argument.

        All in all, if there’s any truth to the climate change claims, then why have all their predictions failed? Why hasn’t the United States been flooded from all the melting ice? What is there to be alarmed about? The ones who’ve been proven right are the ones saying there’s nothing to be alarmed about. So explain to me why I should be alarmed when all the doom and gloom fear mongerers have been wrong and the ones calling this a hoax have been proven right and vindicated by all the fraudulent data uncovered? Should we just resort to all these governmental laws and sanctions to appease those who think the sky is falling? I think not.

  2. Even the richest renewable energy company has a couple order of magnitudes less than the oil companies. I always ask my students, if there is a conspiracy caused by massive amounts of money to report fall science who is most likely to do that? Who has the most money?

  3. All of you make some great points this. What I have found recently is that this works both ways. There are climatologist (geologists in general) who do not particulary agree with everything the IPCC states in there assessment reports. Though there numbers were never as large but the number is growing. Since then, they too have been accused of taking money from oil companies, etc.

  4. We all should care if it’s a hoax or not. The impact and consequences are huge- if not catastrophic. If climate change isn’t a hoax, then we need to raise taxes considerably in order to reduce our carbon footprint, and we need bigger government to save us from the impending disaster and doom that mankind is imposing upon the world. Run for the hills!

    Seriously, I’m not a fan of conspiracy theories either, but if we simply dismiss them without reason, then we’ll be easily fooled by political agendas and those wishing to increase their power, wealth, fame and fortune… things we both seem to despise. I think we should heed all the failed predictions of this movement and stop giving them any credibility. There are plenty of scientists who reject the doom and gloom prophets and their fear mongering.

    You reject prestige and money as motivations for perpetuating a hoax, but take Al Gore as a prime example. The prestige, wealth and power he’s receiving from his efforts are overwhelming. He has the means to influence the scientific community, and he’s succeeded at persuading others to agree with him. It’s not based on real science; I think it’s based more on fear and emotion. In my humble opinion, the scientific community can be easily influenced by politics, money and agendas. That happens in every human occupation. Scientists, while held with esteem, virtue and reason, are not immune from the human condition and other influences. I don’t think most do this consciously, but indoctrination is a powerful influence.

    I think there’s evidence to suggest that fossil fuels can be renewed naturally. In fact that’s how they originated. But even if it is finite, we’ll never run out because, at some point, it will cease to be cost effective, or we’ll find a cheaper, better source of energy. Necessity is the mother of all invention, right? And even if we used up every drop of oil, how is that a negative, especially if it forces us to use the renewable energy you’re espousing? What living organism, besides man, cares about fossil fuels?

    I don’t like the oil spills or man-made disasters any more than you do, but we have to fess up to them. They’re bound to happen from time to time, even if they’re inexcusable. We need to learn from them and get better at preventing them and improve our efforts. But I’m thankful that God has provided us a robust earth that is able to clean itself and recover from these unfortunate disasters. And remember that trees and plants need CO2 to survive, so if we begin to limit the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, it may make some people happy, but it could cause unintended consequences. For one, you’re removing a necessary ingredient for other organisms. Do you really want to starve plants? I’d suggest that pumping CO2 into the atmosphere is helpful to the environment and the natural cycle. Why do some believe CO2 is bad and must be reduced just because we expel it?

    All the alternatives, like solar energy and wind turbines are more expensive and aren’t cost effective, and that’s why they’re not popular. Imposing such things will hurt the poor and needy and third world countries the most because they won’t be able to afford the cost increases. Human beings need cheap energy sources so that they can survive.

    Nothing is stopping anyone from coming up with better alternatives resulting from a free market system. If you can find the perfect solution, then I’m listening. I just don’t know of anything better than what we have now. I don’t want the government to impose stupid rules and regulations upon us in an effort to “reduce our carbon footprint”. They’re the ones who stand to profit the most from this hoax. Remember the Solindra scandal.

  5. I wonder if people actually read the literature that discusses the causes of climate change? As a student, in my free time, I have access to thousands of literature about this very subject. I have been reading about this for years and found that over time, no everyone can be 100% correct. If you look at every assessment report by the IPCC in terms of how much temperature will rise, they have been off by a large percentage every time. The temperature is still rising, however. We know that from the satellite data. The use of computers to project this data is dictated by what information is currently available from current sources.

    I understand this… what I don’t understand is when I hear an advocate of man-made climate change “deny” that there is no other evidence against theirs. This confuses me because I am currently reading some off of my school’s library website. In fact, I am currently saving the PDF’s to my desktop they’re so good. Much of the literature found in the peer reviewed journals cite the……get this…IPCC…. So, a lot people tell me. “There’s so much science to back this up so why are you denying this?” I usually respond with this: “Well, who is the organization that compiles all of these research and where are these scientists from?” I know the answers to that but for people who advocate for this, then why do not read the literature?

    Most of it comes from one source and that’s the IPCC. There is no conspiracy because they are just trying to find answers to the earth’s riddles. However, there are those that disagree with some of these scientists. In fact, they disagree because of the authoritative nature of the IPCC itself. For one, they’re too involved in the political arena. Second, they have been involved in a multitude of controversial scandals that were hardly investigated. A lot of these ended up being a no-biggie but still, why so much controversy? A lot of it comes from people who were actually geologists themselves, in disagreement with the IPCC’s methods of promoting their science.

    With that said, the IPCC is the best available! No matter the dissenting voices and stories of disagreement=job loss, they’re still the best we have.

    Green energy is great. No disagreement there. I would love to have solar energy actually produce enough to sustain people. Or better yet, people just use less energy? Or even better, make products more efficient? Yes and yes.

    To respond to Mr. Silcox: the only way for market forces to be on par with green energy is if people actually dive into it. Currently, the “green” market is based off of a market system but you’re right about people not buying much of it. If more people could afford to actually buy, instead of having it subsidized or count as a tax deduction, then companies could respond in kind….ie make more cheaper and efficient green energy sources. Can’t rely on the government to subsidize and invest in this….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s