By: Morgan

Morgan — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 18:39:31 +0000

I’m curious if anyone is studying people between the ages of 15 and 25 who have or are going to school w/ climate curriculum. We policy junkies always try to sway voters and adults; I think that’s a questionable allocation of advocacy resources.

By: Dave McArthur

Dave McArthur — Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:49:26 +0000

It is possible this column is off topic and is confused the point of being meaningless if its object is to promote a science of the stewardship of our atmosphere.
The fact that “72% of Independents acknowledge solid evidence of global warming” is meaningless because it does not mean they actually care about the impact of their activities on the climate balances that sustain us. They may, for instance, decide to vote for a political party that states that it cares for these vital balances by means of carbon trading systems rather than carbon taxation systems. Carbon trading systems are a profoundly flawed psychology and actively deny stewardship of our atmosphere. They tend to reward the polluters and punish the non-polluters. They enable polluters to continue polluting while salving their consciences. Indeed many people who say they believe human activities can impact climate balances generate far more pollution than many people who cannot imagine how their activities might impact on these balances. So talk about the climate may alter how people vote but may not alter how they act.
Here in New Zealand in the months after the release of Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” new car purchases reached record highs, air travel increased 16% and the NZ Green Party ditched carbon taxes and implemented a carbon trading regime instead – exactly as was predicted pre the movie release. This occurred despite the rapidly rising price of mineral oil! Currently the NZ Government is borrowing a billion dollars a month for 4.4 million people to fund our national carbon trading scheme and subsidise extra motorway systems.
A science of stewardship is necessarily founded in the great principles of physics. These suggest that all objects are constantly warming as they are cooling- they exist while warming is balanced by cooling. This is the nature of universal change- all is a continual flux. This article denies reality by confusing warming with warming up i.e. no change of state with a change of state. This cannot be. Perhaps all those Americans surveyed are similarly confused? Certainly President Obama and many of his advisers are very confused about this basic physics and psychology.
More at http://www.thesustainabilityprinciple.org
In kindness.

By: quimby

quimby — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 20:02:12 +0000

Does the poll indicate whether the respondents believe that the warming is due to human activities? Without that, it doesn’t do much for advancing climate policies except perhaps mitigation. Also, it’s hard to see any policy that will unite those Democrats and Independants. Generally, the climate polling doesn’t do much for me because it ignores so many of the political realities. There was an interesting piece in the New Yorker recently (about the bully pulpit in general) noting that a President identifying a signature issue can actually work against developing solutions.

Comments on: Climate—A Winning Wedge Issue At Last?

By: Morgan

By: Dave McArthur

By: quimby