Climate Change Controversy: More Than One Question
Those who decry climate change “deniers” tend to lump them all into one group who reject the entire suite of concerns. In reality, it is far more complicated than that. The climate change controversy is made up of many separate, cascading propositions.
While climate alarmism appears to be premised upon the acceptance of the entire program, the “deniers” are a more diverse group that may reject, or merely be skeptical of, one or more points in the narrative. I believe it does a disservice to legitimate debate, at best, and is disingenuous, at worst, to overlook the many levels of questions that make up this issue.
Here are what I see as the high level breakdown of separate concerns in this debate.
- Has the earth recently warmed, overall?
- Is it still doing so and/or will it continue?
- Is it a serious problem, and for who/what?
- Is it caused primarily by human activity?
- Can we effectively reverse it?
- Is it worth the economic and political costs it would take to do so?
- How should we proceed?
Acceptance of #1 does not require acceptance of all, and rejection of the proposed energy & environmental policies of the Left does not imply rejection of all points. The Left prefers to frame the debate merely as those who respect science versus the deniers. I suspect this may intentionally be done, because the farther down the list of questions you go, the harder it is for them to produce solid evidence for their answers.
Don’t let them set the terms.
I would suggest that anyone arguing this issue make sure they have first identified the exact point(s) of disagreement, and don’t let (alleged) proofs relating to one question be taken as support for another.