Just Because It’s Cold, Doesn’t Mean It’s Not Getting Warmer

One thing most of us in the U.S. can agree on: it’s cold outside. While we’re all freezing our collective asses off, though, some of us are taking the extra step to use the unusually low temperatures to debunk the reality of global warming.

“Oh shit,” some of you are saying now, “Will’s gonna give us an earful about how we need to save the environment. He’s gonna transform into Al Gore and preach to us about our responsibility to the planet.”

Well, I’m not. Not quite. Because it’s probably pointless to try and argue facts vs. “facts” with most non-believers. It’s kind of like a person who believes in God arguing with a devout athiest – regardless of how well either side presents his argument, in the end only stubbornness wins.

To the extent that I feel I need to defend the facts, I’ll only cite three things. The first is a quote lifted directly from the web site of the Environmental Defense Fund: “Furthermore, a single year of cold weather in one region of the globe is not an indication of a trend in the global climate, which refers to a long-term average over the entire planet.”

Let’s say you have a desert. And one summer it rains in that desert for a week, when ordinarily it’s dry as a bone. That doesn’t mean the place is no longer a desert – you just have an isolated weather phenomenon that flies in the face of the overall conditions. Same with this cold snap and global warming. I don’t think that’s hard to understand, but some people seem to have a problem grasping the concept.

For further edification, here’s a second citation – I’ll simply refer you to the Voice of America article titled “Meteorologists: Global Warming and Cold Weather Go Hand-In Hand.” The title says it all, but you should still take the time to read it.

Finally, I’ll cite this quote, also lifted from the EDF web site: “The most respected scientific bodies have stated unequivocally that global warming is occurring, and people are causing it by burning fossil fuels (like coal, oil and natural gas) and cutting down forests. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which in 2005 the White House called ‘the gold standard of objective scientific assessment,’ issued a joint statement with 10 other National Academies of Science saying “the scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action.”

The only debate in the science community about global warming is about how much and how fast warming will continue as a result of heat-trapping emissions. Scientists have given a clear warning about global warming, and we have more than enough facts — about causes and fixes — to implement solutions right now.”

Given all that, I think I’d rather spend my time here ruminating over WHY someone would deny something that I think’s undeniable. I have three theories, all or none of which might pertain to “non-believers” out there. I invite you to bring forth other theories – if they’re viable and interesting, I’ll certainly post them.

Oh, and I’m not talking about those scientists, politicians, policy-makers, and pundits who are actively debunking global warming. I KNOW why they’re doing it. Money. They’re getting paid, re-elected, or whatever, to say the words put into their mouths by those who see the changes that need to be made as a threat to the bottom line.

I’m talking about the average person who, for whatever reason, chooses to disbelieve the truth.

OK. Here we go with theory one:

Some people hop on the anti-global warming bandwagon because of its nonconformist appeal. For some, because of the dogma they USUALLY have to adhere to in their workaday, do-what-you’re-supposed-to-or-God’s-gonna-get-you lives, it’s cool to FINALLY be able to cling to a “rebellious” notion, one that flies in the face of long-accepted facts and established trends. Disbelieving the facts of global warming is a way for them to “buck the system.”

Theory two:

Others feel the need to toe the party line – if it’s what their favorite pundit or their Sunday preacher says, then it must be true. Ironically, it bears pointing out that the scientific community mentioned in the EDF quote above was lauded by the Bush Administration, and that the VOA article I linked to emanated from the Bush White House – the same Administration and White House which rejected the Kyoto Protocol and had a notorious reputation for being pro-industry and anti-environmental. So, if THAT administration is unwilling to dispute facts, well….

The sad thing to me is that the threat of global warming OUGHT to transcend party politics. Alas, though, for some that’s all there is….

Theory three:

Finally, I think it’s a way for some people to alleviate the guilt they feel for “contributing” to global warming by driving, cooking with gas, spraying aerosols, and farting. If it’s not real, then they’re not guilty of anything, right?

Well, I have another solution for their guilt.

In New York there’s a famous “National Debt Clock” which continually ticks off the increasing amount of money our government owes. I don’t know if the subsection of the clock is still active which displayed the amount each individual family owed; it was still there when I left the city.

I remember that every time I passed the clock, I’d see how much I personally “owed” and I’d laugh. Sure, no doubt I owned some of that debt, being a beneficiary of a variety of government programs, but I always felt that my portion had to be significantly lower than the posted average.

That may or may not be true, but what IS true is that you and I, average individuals who go about our daily lives just like most average individuals, do not “own” a relatively significant portion of the global warming “debt.” There are a vast array of other entities who are MUCH higher contributors to global warming – your morning commute is NOTHING compared to them.

There. Feel better?

You see, you really don’t need to change your behavior that much. All you have to do is BELIEVE. I think that if enough people begin to accept the facts that have been in front of them for a long, long time, then eventually that belief will insinuate itself into politics and industry leaders, who are the ones who can REALLY affect change. And then they, in turn, will act on their beliefs.

Now, there are those who think that this sort of slow evolution is too slow – that we need to ACT NOW to save the planet. They may be right – evidence does point to the possibility that climate change is a ticking time bomb.

And it IS a given, too, that if people would take the time and energy they waste arguing against the facts, and instead use that time and energy to do the little-bitty things they COULD do to help slow the effects of global warming, then they’d discover yet another way to alleviate their guilt.

We gotta start somewhere, and believing is a start. Change your attitude. Save the world.