Monday 11 May 2015

Global Warming Series: Part I - Vested Interests

The most serious threat compromising the future habitability of the planet is the long-term consequences of Global Warming. Climate models predict that a continued increase of global temperatures will irrevocably jeopardize the integrity of our life-supporting biosphere, leading to a vast spectrum of environmentally destabilizing effects; including heat-waves, rising sea-levels, frequent hurricanes, declining global food stocks and a loss of ecosystems and biodiversity. A recent report from the IPCC, a gathering of the world’s leading experts on the subject, concluded with 95 percent certainty, that human activity – primarily the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation – is the dominant cause of the current trend.[i] Furthermore, an analysis of 11,944 peer-reviewed scientific papers published between 1991 and 2011 was recently conducted; showing 98.4 percent of the studies also endorsed the position that the rise in global average temperatures over the past century is almost entirely human-induced.[ii] If these estimations are correct, a social imperative arises, requiring a deep reflection of our current socio-economic practices and whether they are suitable for our continued survival on this planet. 

While the reality of Anthropogenic Global Warming has been settled within the scientific literature, opinion is strongly divided within the political arena and amongst the general public at large, unfortunately with increasing skepticism. For example a 2007 Harris poll found that 71 percent of Americans accepted the science behind man-made climate change, but by June 2011 it had declined to just 44 percent with identicial patterns showing up in the U.K. and Australia. Scott Keeter, director of survey research at the Pew Research Centre for people, described the statistics in the United States as 
"amongst the largest shifts over a period of time seen in recent public opinion history"[iii]
Simultaneously, there has also been a predictable backlash amongst the politically conservative, with many claiming that anthropogenic global warming is a hoax, masterfully concocted by the U.N., environmentalist extremists and ‘Marxist economists’ to mislead the public with fraudulent data and fear-mongering. The sole purpose being to reinvent themselves as the saviors of the planet as a façade for implementing a ‘One World Government Tyranny.’ A prominent target is former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, who introduced Global Warming to a wider audience with his award winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth. Conservative pundits argue that Gore benefits from promoting the theory of anthropogenic global warming, even going as far to claim that he is the world’s first ‘carbon billionaire,’ from directly profiteering off of the climate and energy policies he urges the governments to adopt.[iv] This also includes the fact that he partly owns ‘Generation Investment Management,’ the company he advocates people purchase carbon credits from in an attempt to reduce the net carbon emissions of individuals or organizations. However, if we are to be impartial with an examination of global warming in any real sense, it must also be acknowledged that the vested interest argument could easily be applicable to both sides of the ideological spectrum. A cursory glance at history will reveal a plethora of examples of how corporate interests have funded front-groups and public relation campaigns that purposefully attempt to distort and misrepresent the scientific consensus to the public, in order to maintain maximizing profits regardless of the environmental or social cost. A classic example being the Tobacco Industry which was found guilty under the RICO statute because it...
“knew the dangers of smoking as early as 1953 and conspired to suppress this knowledge. They conspired to fight the facts, and to merchandise doubt”[v]
In relation to global warming, there are many entrenched interests who benefit from the both current economic system and energy infrastructure, who would stand to lose a lot of money and political power if action were taken to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide dumped into the atmosphere. For example a 2013 study by Riley Dunlap and political scientist Peter Jacques found that 72% of books that challenge the scientific consensus on global warming were linked to conservative think-tanks.[vi] Furthermore, a February 2013 report in the Guardian revealed that between 2002 and 2010, a network of anonymous U.S. Billionaires had donated nearly $120 million to groups casting doubt about the science behind climate-change.[vii] Hence, anyone trying to get an understanding of Global Warming merely by invoking the 'who benefits' argument is largely futile. While I do agree that the profit-motive is worth taking into consideration when attempting to identify any potential conflict of interests in a study, it shouldn't be dismissed merely on that basis -- for profit isn't the only bias.  Subsequently, the funding of a particular scientific study doesn't provide us with enough information on whether or not a certain claim has any actual credibility. If Anthropogenic Global Warming is indeed a left-wing scam, then the arguments for it should be transparently false regardless of funding and very easy to dismantle, right?  In this series, I will be examining global warming skeptic claims and seeing whether or not they stand up to scrutiny. It is my hope that those who are doubtful will be open to changing their opinion when confronted with a communication of the science absent of political rhetoric. In the words of Mark Lynas...
“If we reject data-driven empiricism and evidence as the basis for identifying and solving problems, we have nothing left but vacuous ideology and self-referential myth-making.” [viii]
[i] IPCC Report: UN Scientists 95% Sure Humans To Blame For Climate Change
[http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/09/27/global-warming-humans_n_4000525.html]
[ii] Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature 
[iii] Klien, N (2014) This Changes Everything: Capitalism Vs The Climate, (Canada, Alfred A. Knopf) pp. 30
[iv]Al Gore could become world’s first carbon billionaire 
[v] Oreskes, N and Conway, E (2010) Merchants Of Doubt: How A Handful Of Scientists Obscured The Truth On Issues From Tobacco Smoke To Global Warming, New York USA: Bloomsbury Press pp. 33 
[vi] Klien, N (2014) This Changes Everything: Capitalism Vs The Climate, (Canada, Alfred A. Knopf) pp. 33
[vii] Secret funding helped build vast network of climate denial thinktanks 


[viii] Time To Call Out The Anti-GMO Conspiracy Theory 
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)