On the Front Lines of the Climate Change Wars
http://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2012-03-15/front-lines-climate-change-wars
Michael Mann found himself on the front lines of the climate change wars when his email account was hacked as part of the so-called 'Climategate' scandal in 2009. The controversy surrounding his work intensified when Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli sought the release of documents related to grant applications Mann made at the University of Virginia. We talk with Mann about the climate change research he pioneered and the interjection of politics in international, and local, debates over climate science.
Guests
Michael Mann
professor, Penn State University Departments of Meteorology and Geosciences and Earth and Environmental Systems Institute; director, Earth Science Center at Penn State University; co-founder, www.realclimate.org; 2007 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate (shared)
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Kojo,
Can you please ask your guest why people persist in calling this phenomenon "global warming" instead of "climate change?" Climate change, in my opinion, is both an accurate name and eliminates a line of argument for skeptics who cite colder than normal weather patterns as reason to deny the science.
Thank you,
Shelly
Washington, DC
Kojo! Big fan here. Quick comment: one big misunderstanding about climate change is that its whether humans can survive in a warmer environment (rather than a a conversation about the 'planet' which had countless cataclismic events in the past and life thrived). May be that way it wouldn't be perceived as a 'tree-hugger' idea, and that it is about us.
Thank you,
I think that the question at hand is whether corporations are "people" and have the capacity of speech. As actual humans are hired or contracted to corporations that have their "soul" or raison d'etre being financial success with only the law and consumer reaction, but not ethics or empathy, constraining their actions, we are doomed to have misinformation drowning out serious conversation. Corporations do not have the power of speech, but have the organizing principle that can subvert what people might say if ethics and personal liability bound them.
When leaded gas was formulated and allowed to be patented, the corporations involved saw a potential monopoly that preempted the ethical choice to not move forward with a known toxin. The science was clear, but the law had not yet caught up with science. And it took untold misery and over a half century of pollution, before leaded gas was banned here in the US.*
So corporations with vast sums of profits have created false speech to limit the law or consumer reaction from preempting smart laws. Ethics and empathy have no role for their spokespeople. And because the financial impact is immediate and profitable to forestall change, corporations are poorly equipped to make the significant changes that will only show profit more than ten years out or for potential competitors.
For us people, the changes that can mitigate climate change are extremely beneficial in terms of our survival, economic health and even comfort. Today houses can be built profitably that are 80% energy efficient, there is technology to make cars commute at better than 100mpg (we should include miles per dollar as a statistic to better grasp ROI).
We have a choice, let corporations drown out human speech and diminish our chances of honest conversation and problem solving. Or we can be aware of this current danger and make changes a society that values ethics and knowledge and drives the law forward.
Daniel Bennett
Washington, DC
* http://www.thenation.com/article/secret-history-lead