David's comment made me think of what it is where I live in the Northeast
that has people taking climate change seriously.

If you can show how it affects a persona' pocket-book Americans will pay
attention..

Here in Vermont it's not the heatwaves we've had and odd dry spells that
have people thinking about climate, it's the measurable change in the
timing and extend of sugaring season, it's the warm winters that don't
freeze the ground enough to allow logging machinery to be driven onto
frozen wetlands to log without damaging the ground or losing machinery,
it's the infrastructure damage caused by Lake Champlain flooding and by
large storms like Irene.  It is odd weather that affects the tourist
industry of leaf peepers and skiers or corn production.  It's the changing
time birds return to Vermont and the changes in what species come here and
how long they stay.

Most of those things are individual events, difficult or impossible to tie
specifically to climate change, but the over-all pattern and frequency of
events like these are what has people here paying attention.

There will always be people who deny what's put in front of them (there are
Flat-Earthers out there), but if it can be put in an economic context,
people will pay much closer attention.

There is an interesting climate change movie out called Carbon Nation aimed
at denialists that focuses on the economic aspect instead.
http://www.good.is/post/carbon-nation-the-climate-change-movie-that-doesn-t-care-if-you-believe-in-climate-change/

Good luck with it all, it's an issue that has been unnecessarily
politicized and used as a polarizing agent

Neahga Leonard


On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 12:08 AM, David Duffy <[email protected]> wrote:

> Paul, I am not saying it is entirely rational, but after this heat wave,
> there will be a lot fewer climate doubters. The 1930's had similar
> devastating heat waves, also with no air conditioning, so such things can't
> necessarily be blamed on anthropogenic climate change.  The saying goes
> that "weather is one week, climate is 30 years", but the distinction may be
> lost on folks back east. Reassurances from web sites and industry leaders
> are all fine and dandy, but at 105 F they ring rather hollow.
>
> Americans don't do well on complex issues, but a heat wave may cut through
> the obscurantist misma.
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Paul Cherubini <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 2, 2012, at 1:45 PM, Corbin, Jeffrey D. wrote:
> >
> >  1) but I made the specific point at our counter-presentation that
> >> we have a great deal to discuss as to HOW society should
> >> confront climate change - Cap&Trade, Carbon tax, mitigation,
> >> etc. But such a discussion must begin with an acceptance of
> >> the understood science.
> >>
> >
> > The notion of anthropogenic global warming is not hardly
> > settled.  There is a large body of anthropogenic doubters,
> > especially because global mean temps have stabilized
> > since 1998 http://tinyurl.com/6ca5gzt  That flattening of
> > warming was not predicted by the anthropogenic warmists.
> >
> >  2)  the general public who does have difficulty filtering
> >> out the conflicting sides of the "debate".
> >>
> >
> > The public and industry pay alot of attention to websites
> > such as http://wattsupwiththat.com/ that examine the
> > claims and track records of the anthropogenic climate
> > alarmists in great depth and provide evidence suggesting
> > global mean temps may continue to be relatively
> > stable for another 20 years or so.
> >
> > The public also listens to industry leaders who says things like:
> > "fears about climate change, drilling, and energy dependence
> > are overblown" -  http://tinyurl.com/6wezuce
> >
> > Paul Cherubini
> > El Dorado, Calif.
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit
> Botany
> University of Hawaii
> 3190 Maile Way
> Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA
> 1-808-956-8218
>

Reply via email to