Why TV Weather Forecasters Don't Believe in Climate Change

The Columbia Review of Journalism just published an intriguing study about TV weather forecasters and their skepticism concerning anthropogenic climate change. (http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/hot_air.php?page=all) It is certainly worth reading.

A salient point here is that the American public trusts their weather forecasters on this subject even though most forecasters have no, or minimal, training in climatology. Moreover, weather forecasters themselves don't believe in climate science, but they don't actually know any of the science; they just don't think it is likely. So, the situation is this: TV meteorologist don't believe in a science they haven't studied but then teach it to the public who is persuaded by the TV authority who actually isn't an authority. This is the ignorant leading the ignorant to ignorance. Shouldn't there be some standards?

Combatting Depression

The GreenHumanist is depressed. The incivility of public life has reached a new nadir, it seems. Each day, I read a new story about various environmental challenges we face. And each day, I read reactions to such stories that convey deep suspicion, animosity, and disbelief. (For instance, witness the developing story about CIA satellites collecting environmental data and the reaction.)

• If such reactions were rare, I wouldn't be as depressed.
• If such reactions were a difference of interpretation of evidence, I wouldn't be as depressed.
• If such reactions were only a result of different political values, I would be as depressed.

Instead, though, they often deliberately mislead readers/viewers, offer known lies and misdirections as facts, and dishonestly confuse issues and differences. There is an enormous difference between saying, "I believe in minimal national government and so I'm reluctant to increase the monitoring powers of the Environmental Protection Agency." And, "Climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Marxists who run this country." (For some examples, see: this or this, or this, or this, or this.)

The GreenHumanist is an enormous fan of democracy. I celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the National Environmental Policy Act this month, because that law created avenues for the public to comment. As such, decisions about land use were no longer focused in the hands of a few special interests (e.g., timber companies, ranchers, industry). Instead, the public, activists, and scientists were given opportunities to learn of, question, and challenge plans to dam rivers, increase the timber cutting quotas, and site a toxic waste dump in my neighborhood or yours.

Because I like democracy, I do not call for the end of public discussion or debate about these central matters for the environment and our life within those webs of life. I do call on those of you who care about the environment to step up in the public debate with civility, even when confronted with incivility. I would urge you to use real-life case studies of environmental harm be it pollution, erosion, or environmental racism. I hope you would use honesty and compassion (and facts).

Ultimately, we will not solve global environmental crises by more science. (This is a major premise behind this blog.) It requires cultural changes. One change can come through increasing civility in public debate and not rising to the green-baiting tactics of the deniers of environmental problems. This will require creativity and patience, the latter being especially difficult in times of crisis. Yet, without it, we become as shrill and as anti-democratic as those who would deny us our legitimacy. We cannot sink so low. (And, of course, none of this is to say that we should not work to build a grassroots social movement.)

5 Green Resolutions for 2010 | Cool Green Science: The Conservation Blog of The Nature Conservancy

Check out these five Green Resolutions. Fairly modest, to be sure. If everyone committed to five Green Resolutions, the impact might end up being noticeable at the local scale anyhow. What have you resolved?

5 Green Resolutions for 2010 | Cool Green Science: The Conservation Blog of The Nature Conservancy

Posted using ShareThis

A New Year, Another Blog

The GreenHumanist has been AWOL for far too long. Perhaps in the New Year I will post more regularly. In fact, I’d make that a New Year’s Resolution, but those seldom seem to work, do they? My work is likely to be ramped up even more, but much of it will be of direct interest to this blog’s purpose. That might mean more posts.

In the meantime, you might check out the best and worst of 2009 (and the decade) by Treehugger.com.

The GreenHumanist continues to believe that the earth faces a global environmental crisis. The nature of that crisis remains unbelievably complex. Understanding it and working to resolve it demands the most creative thinking we can muster. Fundamentally, too, it requires cultural change among those societies that have done the most to cause the problems all global citizens face. Since cultural change is almost never driven by science or engineering, the GreenHumanist encourages a greater presence of humanities scholars in environmental debates.

Business and Environmental Sustainability

As the GreenHumanist wrote before, the business of business and the environment is a critical and paradoxical one. Capitalism is often cited as the driving force of ecological havoc. Certainly, countless examples show capitalism as often damaging. (Socialism and communism were no picnics for nature, either.) However, capitalism and big industrial economies are unlikely to disappear. It becomes imperative, then, for businesses to step up and make changes.

Many politicians and executives make it seem as though greening their practices will destroy the U.S. or global economy instantaneously. This, of course, is ridiculous. A strong economy must be a green economy.


Hunter Lovins, co-author of Natural Capitalism, is among the leading thinkers in this area. She and allies have begun making in-roads with large corporations. (Listen to an interview with her here.) This posting by Corey W. deVos explores some of the successes and ways that being better capitalists--namely, by reducing waste--will be better for the Earth. One example: DuPont--certainly not the poster-company for environmental responsibility--reduced carbon emissions by 65% ahead of schedule and is saving about $2.2 billion annually.

This is interesting for several reasons. One, businesses are taking action, despite what we sometimes are led to believe. Two, they are doing so without governmental regulation, something we have often thought is necessary to initiate significant action. Three, profitability is not declining in businesses as they make environmental responsibility a hallmark. The next time you hear that businesses are all bad, that government regulation is necessary, or that greening business will mean declining economic output, you can counter such charges. They are simply lies.

To be certain, economic growth cannot go on forever. Endless growth is not sustainable. I am persuaded that a steady-state economy is a better hope for the world's sustainability. Yet, promoting economic efficiency, which will mean minimizing ecological impacts, is a step that must be taken. Beginning yesterday.

Reminder: International Day of Action is 24 October

With the latest focus on health care reform and the ubiquitous celebrity shenanigans, it is sometimes easy to forget about the on-going efforts to combat climate change--the most critical cause of our generation and the next for our planet.

350.org has launched the International Day of Action for 24 October. The organization is increasing its activism to demand better global warming action from policymakers and business leaders.

Pay attention in your local communities to see if there are events you can support (you can find these on the website). 350.org created an effective presentation you can download and use at your Day of Action at www.350.0rg/presentation.




For those of you desiring some explanation of the science, check out http://co2now.org/. In addition, there are still skeptics about various points out there. This website takes several of those points and examines them rigorously: http://www.grist.org/article/series/skeptics/.

What are you doing about it?

Where Has the GreenHumanist Been?; Power of Place

Where did August go? Where did most of September go? Without deadlines, it has become too easy to let this blog slump. With a little more dedication and a little less travel, the blog will be updated more regularly in the coming months.

One reason the GreenHumanist has not been active is travel to far away places. In August, I hiked in the Glacier Peak Wilderness Area in Washington's Cascade Mountains. Below is a photo from my campsite. It was a challenging hike but well worth to have views like this. It was a reminder that occasionally (or much more often) we need to get out, Out, OUT of our heads and into places.

A few weeks later for a conference, I traveled to Iqaluit (map) in Nunavut (which is in Canada for those you don't know). No one would miss the airport:

As part of the conference, we were able to spend an afternoon at Sylvia Grinnell Territorial Park. A remarkable place for a "southerner" like me. (Nearly everyone's a southerner to those in Iqaluit!)

These photos give a sample of the landscape of southern Baffin Island.

Being in a place so distant, meeting with Inuit, listening respectfully to elders, connecting with other humanists--together, these made the trip quite exciting and wholly worthwhile. I'm afraid it did not spark any particularly useful insights for this blog, other than reinforcing that the power of place--its landscape and culture combined over time--is among the most humbling teachers of all. How easy we forget that when we buzz to and fro in our suburban/urban/exurban lives in temperate climes.