Former president Donald Trump mocks the threat posed by human-induced climate change.
And Trump finds support for his views among many Republican members of Congress, including Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO).
To counter this misinformation, I encourage reading “The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism.” It’s available online and provides an excellent summary of the lines of evidence that have led 200 science academies throughout the world, including the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, to conclude that climate change is human-caused.
Consider that the Israel Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran agree on this issue.
If one is serious about examining the issue of human-induced climate change, the place to start is understanding why scientists believe it.
In reality, however, the climate debate isn’t about science — it’s about the role of government. Many conservatives dismiss evidence of climate risk because they fear that acceptance of this evidence will lead to greater government intrusion in our lives. Science is a proxy debate.
Ever wonder why we don’t hear scores of angry voices claiming that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS? It’s because that scientific conclusion doesn’t threaten deeply held values.
In his book, “The Constitution of Liberty,” Nobel Prize-winning economist and libertarian Friedrich Hayek writes: “Personally, I find that the most objectionable feature of the conservative attitude is its propensity to reject well-substantiated new knowledge because it dislikes some of the consequences which seem to follow from it.”
Climate change poses great threats, such as extreme weather, more intense wildfires and the ravaging of the world’s coral reefs. Conservatives would be unlikely to tolerate this level of risk with regard to national defense or financial markets.
Prudence dictates that we also hedge against the risk of disastrous climate change.
Terry Hansen
Milwaukee, Wisconsin