How the global warming denial machine stops government action

Sharon Begley just completed an excellent piece for the August 13th edition of Newsweek that exposes the tactics that oil companies and DC lobbyists have used to prevent legislative action to combat global warming.  It is a very long article, but well worth the read.

In this one excerpt, Begley explains how special interests rely on Republican lawmakers to kill legislation aimed at energy independence.  Lawmakers and lobbyists write talking points that use words such as "uncertainty" or "lack of understanding" to put doubt in the minds of Americans about there being sufficient evidence to support the overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming:

Killing bills in Congress was only one prong of the denial machine'scampaign. It also had to keep public opinion from demanding action ongreenhouse emissions, and that meant careful management of what federalscientists and officials wrote and said. "If they presented the sciencehonestly, it would have brought public pressure for action," says RickPiltz, who joined the federal Climate Science Program in 1995. Byappointing former coal and oil lobbyists to key jobs overseeing climatepolicy, he found, the administration made sure that didn't happen.Following the playbook laid out at the 1998 meeting at the AmericanPetroleum Institute, officials made sure that every report and speechcast climate science as dodgy, uncertain, controversial—and thereforeno basis for making policy. Ex-oil lobbyist Philip Cooney, working forthe White House Council on Environmental Quality, edited a 2002 reporton climate science by sprinkling it with phrases such as "lack ofunderstanding" and "considerable uncertainty." A short section onclimate in another report was cut entirely. The White House "directedus to remove all mentions of it," says Piltz, who resigned in protest.An oil lobbyist faxed Cooney, "You are doing a great job."

Full Article

As a culture, we trust experts: auto repair, medicine, cooking -- you name it.  So when an issue as large as our very existence is at stake, why are the experts being discounted?

Comments

[George]

Why? $$$$$$$

It's very profitable destroy the planet.

[Chief Editor: Todd]

Yes, and it's also very profitable to save the earth. But different people would lose money, and different people would make money. The people that would lose money are already in power, and are therefore trying to stop it from happening.

[Jon]

I wouldn't mind so much if only those who deny reality were affected. Its almost like a double punishment for people who get how serious this is.

1. We know its coming but our efforts are hampered by profiteers and people who don't want to give up their lavish lifestyle.

2. When the ecological bills start rolling in and we have to start paying them EVERYONE will have to pay. It won't matter who knew all along and who denied it until the end.

[George]

Todd, you are 100% correct.

Jon, you are 100% right too.

It's all a matter of electing reform in 2008. It has to start then.