Put away the pitchforks, people – climate change is still real

Last week’s climate change email “scandal” has sent both sides of the argument into an absolute tizzy. Let’s try to clear the air once and for all.

Last week’s climate change email “scandal” has sent both sides of the argument into an absolute tizzy. Let’s try to clear the air once and for all.

First, the obvious: generally, lying is bad. And anyone who lies in the pursuit of monetary or political gain in the face of a global debate should be called out on the spot and, if necessary, stripped of any power over process they may possess.

The Climate Research Unit (CRU) scientists whose emails were “leaked” online made a huge mistake: being stupid. Regardless of the intent, no one, on either side of the aisle, will take them on their word again. The global warming feud is bitter and cold (that pun was slightly intended), and the actions of said scientists are entirely unacceptable. Immense pressure from an entire politically-driven industry intent on crushing their every effort is no excuse for bending the facts, or hiding them completely.

Although I am typically the antagonist against any and all climate change deniers and/or skeptics – as they are generally either a mislead or misleading bunch devoted to greed and political gain – taken on the surface, said skeptics do have a point as well as a valid argument with regard to the statements made in these leaked emails.

Over 1,000 emails and 2,000 other documents were hacked from the CRU and then posted on a Russian file-sharing server late Thursday, referencing in some cases the concealment of data arguing against global warming claims. Once leaked, the university did not help the matter, offering no response or rebuttal beyond simply implying “Hey, you’re not allowed to read those!” while critics lambasted them.

While whether or not the statements within the stolen emails were taken out of context is debatable, undeniable is the fact that their very presence has raised questions over whether or not the argument for global warming is valid.

“This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”

With less than a month to go until the climate-change summit in Copenhagen, this is not good for climate change activists.

“Climate Gate” – Confusing the real issue

Let’s forget, for a moment, the fact that these emails were obtained in a highly illegal manner. Although I typically do not make a habit of aligning myself with The Right, I believe that the notion supported by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. – that the leaked e-mails are “theft” and “crime” that should be investigated regardless of the emails’ contents – is entirely missing the point.

“You call it Climate-gate. I call it E-mail-theft-gate,” said Senator Boxer. She claims that a criminal conspiracy might even be at play.

Senator Boxer is simply arguing the wrong point. Yes, it is unethical to steal emails. But, it is also unethical and even criminal to actively attempt to mislead the public on such an important topic – one that could change the course of human history and survival over the next few decades.

While the hacked emails have the ability to weaken global resolve to curb greenhouse-gas emissions, they offer no real and tangible arguments for either side. We now need to take the higher road and put forth the right argument: the content of these emails, regardless of how they were obtained, needs to be looked at in a comprehensive and responsible manner.

The emails are greatly exaggerated beyond all recognition. The claims which climate change deniers have consistently made throughout their campaigns are simply not supported by any findings in the exposed correspondence.

Yet, words can hurt.

I personally find it ironically sad that the scientific and environmental response has been utter denial and finger-pointing. The emails help fuel the fact-less propaganda surrounding climate change denial, while they instantly revoke the credibility and expertise of those involved.  The only real way to move passed this in a positive direction toward truth is for people to regain a firm grasp on reality.

“I simply can’t believe that there is a kind of mafia that is trying to inhibit critical papers from being published,” said Mojib Latif, a climate researcher at Germany’s Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences. Mr. Latif firmly believes that global warming is, in fact, man-made, and relates current cooling to temporary natural trends.

According to the Copenhagen Diagnosis report – a collection of over 200 scientific papers BEYOND that of the hacked emails -  climate change has rapidly accelerated beyond all previous predictions and humans are to blame. The report shows that global warming emissions in 2008 were nearly 40 percent higher than those in 1990, while sea level rise is 80 percent above past previous predictions.

No real, substantial data supporting global warming has been disproven or dismantled by these stolen emails. Only a few sentences out of context spun completely out of control are doing the damage – and it is PR damage at best.

Finding facts in fiction

The majority of climate scientists today argue that the earth’s temperature is in fact rising, with nearly all in agreement that human activity is the prime suspect.

Climate change skeptics and deniers are leaping onto this “email scandal” with torches and pitch forks in hand, without stopping to understand that not only has their very context been cherry-picked for their own argument’s sake, but that a small handful of scientists sending emails back and forth does not dismantle an entire scientific institution; that climate change is real, it is caused by human activity, and the need to counteract its impacts is beyond crucial.

Yes, the world’s temperature was decreasing, as unbiased studies have shown; over the last 2,000 years, temperatures were steadily going down, mostly due to decreased solar insulation associated with the earth’s orbit.

HOWEVER, just under 200 years ago, the temperature -  scientifically measured by ice cores, tree rings and lake sediments – began a sharp increase and has been steadily rising ever since. This time frame coincides with, obviously, the birth of the industrial revolution; a.k.a. human activity.

These evidences are of course based on science that right-wing climate change deniers simply refuse to believe in, citing faith and man-made notions of world dominion as proof.

Take a look around

But let’s not make any mistakes here: climate change deniers and skeptics have lied and obscured real “data” for years, catalyzing the cause for climate change “rationalists” and believers to adhere to high scientific standards.

Fossil fuel industries have employed “experts” to lie, cheat and manipulate on their behalf – atrocities far greater than anything contained in these emails. And despite years of outright deceit and fraud on their part, it is now the climate scientists who look bad.

Now, because of this one-time “scandal”, the side of truth in the climate change debate needs to work that much harder in order to distinguish itself above the opposition.

In questioning motivations, let’s examine those of the climate change skeptics and deniers; and take a hard look at the oil and gas and coal industries. Each has billions of dollars at stake, and a deep and vested interest in maintaining the status quo; spending millions on lobbying, advertising and funding slanted research to distort the truth and keep as many skeptics ont heir side as possible.

I mean, who are their “superstars”? How about Steve Milloy, Fox News’ “Fair and Balanced” anchor and host of Junk Science who spends most of his time arguing against the medical effects of secondhand smoke and claiming that climate change is fake, all while being a paid advocate and funds-recipient from both Philip Morris and ExxonMobil.

How about resident science “expert” and climate change denier Professor Pat Michaels of the Cato Institute, who has recently been exposed as accepting at least $100,000 by companies involved in coal-fired power production. Michaels himself withdrew as an “expert witness from a court case about climate change” after this funding went public.

And there is Sarah Palin. Ah, Sarah, how you entertain us! Palin, a very public advocate for oil drilling and former Governor of Alaska (a heavily-dependent oil economy), stated during the 2008 campaign: “I’m not one though who would attribute it [climate change] to being manmade.” She then went on to sign executive orders to commence Arctic Sea oil drilling, an up-til-now untapped reserve covered by ice, due to the rapid depletion of ice in the Arctic Sea.

The lost goes on and on, and so do the erroneous claims. Daily Mail columnist Melanie Philips claims that believing in global warming is just plain anti-American, stating that “the theory that global warming is all the fault of mankind is a massive scam based on flawed computer modelling, bad science and an anti-western ideology…” and that “carbon dioxide forms a relatively small proportion of the atmosphere, most of which consists of water vapor.”

Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, who receives more campaign money from fossil fuel companies than any other Senator in the Republican Party, has compared environmentalists to the Third Reich and the US Environmental Protection Agency to the Gestapo. He maintains that climate change is all a big hoax.

And these, ladies and gentleman of the planet, are who we actually become comparable to when such a thing as data manipulation or outright lying takes place – even on the side of the good guys – regardless of cause or reason. Let’s not lose sight of the real goals at hand and stick to the highest of principles, and maybe we will actually get somewhere. Perhaps if done right, we will finally earn the right to call Earth “home”.

Tagged as:

activists, carbon, climate, climate change, coal, Copenhagen, environmental protection, fuel, global warming, research, science