Doubt and Controversy, these are words climate change deniers will use to get you to question the facts about climate change when spoken by climate scientists.
In this country – where the media is overwhelmingly dominated by one man (or his various corporations) – climate change tends to be framed in terms of
climate change debate.
Apparently the jury is still out, weighing up the evidence, throwing a few ideas around and rewarding those with the most convincing argument and spin, instead of those with facts and truth on their side.
So let us all talk about this some more until we reach a conclusion – that kind of debate.
Everyone has an opinion, and believe that entitles them to have an equal say in the climate change
debate, as much as climate scientists, who spent years studying these things.
Listen to climate change deniers – how often is their
debating filled with vague statements, such as I feel, I believe, I heard. Read the Murdoch media, and they fill their articles with anything but science, instead they will focus on how the average Joe, Jane or Tarek feel they will be affected by climate change.
Or, we could ignore a newspaper who just wants to sell readership numbers to advertisers, and instead we could listen to a climate scientist, they will say We know, we have the research, we have studied.
By describing the rejection of climate science as
debate, deniers are throwing doubt on years of science.
Murdoch’s media says NO climate change, Scientists say YES climate change, and now we have controversy, and any scientist who disagrees is being controversial.
Maybe Murdoch media will present a scientists views – without specifying what type of science they study. Science is a broad church, full of various disciplines, not all of them study climate change. Then suddenly the meme is that scientists themselves are unsure about the validity of climate change.
Murdoch’s media will then run a few articles that disagree with scientists or people whining that the cost of running their air-con in their McMansions will be more expensive, and suddenly we have a a debate, or a controversy – two sides that disagree.
The ABC will then run anti-climate change stories, all in the name of balance, it’s about having all viewpoints represented, having all sides of the
debate given serious air-time.
NASA Climate Scientist Compares Climate Change to Slavery (inhabitat.com)
text and digital mischief image (not the polar bear, all the decoration) by @redglitterx