However, oddly, Shermer still isn’t really worried about global warming. He falls into roughly the same camp as Bjorn Lomborg, arguing that it isn’t likely to be a big deal and will be something we can manage. Here is Shermer’s summary of Lomborg’s answers (in the film Cool It) to two key questions that one must confront if one accepts global warming is happening and caused by humans.
Q: How much warmer is it going to get?
A: Probably a little, very unlikely a lot.
Q: What are the consequences of a warmer climate?
A: Debatable depending on how much warmer it will get, but very likely the consequences will be minor.
Now, this baffles me. I don’t understand how anyone could be so confident warming would be on the low end of the projections, and not that big a deal.
When I had Shermer on the show, it was not my goal to debate him about global warming…
Littlemore writes: “The doubt industry has ballooned in the past two decades. There are now scores of think tanks pushing dubious and confusing policy positions, and dozens of phoney grass-roots organisations created to make those positions appear to have legitimate following.”
Our third and last audio interview from the Environmental Wars Conference was with Michael Shermer, the host of the event and founder/editor of Skeptic Magazine. Click here to listen to a 6-minute conversation about the conference and its speakers. He makes the interesting point that although he has recently converted to the ranks of “believers” in climate change, he feels odd using that term, because he says that once the scientific evidence is in, it makes no more sense to say that you are “believe” in global warming than that you believe in gravity. It's just the way it is.
Someone should tell that to all the “skeptics” out there who try to spin it differently…
Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.
There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.