I had been thinking about the subject for my next blog post, when I read Al Gore’s heartbreaking and yet still hopeful article in the June 2011 issue of Rolling Stone Magazine called.“Climate of Denial” It left me with the feeling of “Why am I talking about healthy fats and ghee when the survival of the planet is at stake?’ What could be more basic to holistic mental health than the habitability of our planet? I resolved that I must devote my next blog to this issue before returning to topics of healing with whole food nutrition.
There are some very disturbing parallels between the mechanisms by which truth has been ignored regarding both climate change and the science underlying the USDA food pyramid recommendations for 2010. In both instances there has been a blatant disrespect for science, and instead powerful special interest groups have purchased the political influence which has determined the specific policies which benefit their corporations. ” After World War II, a philosopher studying the impact of organized propaganda on the quality of democratic debate wrote, “The conversion of all questions of truth into questions of power has attacked the very heart of the distinction between true and false.” These issues were at play in the establishment of the guidelines for the USDA Food Pyramid, with lobbyists and special interest groups dictating nutritional recommendations for health, serving to line the pockets of big agra business, rather than policy based upon scientific data for the benefit of public health. (See my first blog post from July 7, 2011 for more about this) The same cynical and self serving forces are at work with regard to the manipulation of the truth regarding climate change, which will result in global catastrophe if we continue on our current course.
Here is a summary and excerpts of what Al Gore had to say and the action steps that we can all take to do our part to avert catastrophe.
Gore draws an analogy between what happened 50 years ago when Science established a link between cigarette smoking and lung disease, and the tactics of the Polluters today. “The tobacco industry hired actors, dressed them up as doctors, and paid them to look into television cameras and to tell people that the linkage revealed in the Surgeon General’s Report was not real at all. The show went on for decades, with more Americans killed each year by cigarettes than all of the U.S. soldiers killed in all of World War II.”
“This time the scientific consensus is even stronger. It has been endorsed by every National Academy of science of every major country on the planet, every major professional society related to the study of global warming and 98 percent of climate scientists throughout the world.” The evidence has been deemed unequivocal. “In an internal document leaked to the New York Times as early as 1991, a consortium of the largest global warming polluters spelled out their principal strategy.”Reposition global warming as theory rather than fact.”Ever since then, they have been sowing doubt more effectively than the tobacco companies before them.”
“Those who profit from unconstrained pollution that is the primary cause of climate change are determined to block our perception of this reality. They have help from many sides: from the private sector, which is now free to make unlimited and secret campaign contributions; from politicians who have conflated their tenures in office with the pursuit of the people’s best interests, and tragically from the press itself, which treats deception and falsehood on the same plane as scientific fact, and calls it objective reporting of alternative opinions.”
Gore states that the average American watches an astonishing five hours of television a day, and gets most of his/her news from that source. For this reason 80 percent of campaign budgets for candidates in both major political parties is devoted to 30 second TV ads. Since the rates for these commercials increase each year, the candidates are forced to raise more and more money in each campaign cycle. “In the new ecology of political discourse, special interest contributors of the large sums of money now required for the privilege of addressing voters on a wholesale basis are not squeamish about asking for the quo they expect in return for their quid. Politicians who don’t acquiesce don’t get the money they need to be elected and re-elected.'”It is now commonplace for congressman and senators first elected decades ago-as I was-to comment in private the the whole process has become unbelievably crass, degrading and horribly destructive of core values of American democracy. Largely as a result the concerns of wealthiest individuals and corporations trump the concerns of average Americans and small businesses.”
Gore presents the evidence for the climate crisis based upon four incontrovertible observations of changes around the globe:
HEAT
2010 was tied with 2005 for the hottest year since instruments were first used systematically in the 1880’s. Nineteen countries set all time record high temperatures. One city in Pakistan reached 128.3 degrees Fahrenheit.. The past decade was the hottest ever measured, though for half that decade the sun was at a “solar minimum”, the low ebb in the natural cycle of solar energy emanating from the sun.
FLOODS
Mega floods displaced 20 million people in Pakistan, further destabilizing a nuclear armed country, inundating an area of Australia larger than Germany and France combined, flooded 28 of the 32 districts that make up Colombia where it has rained continuously for the past year, and led to all time record flood levels in the Mississippi River Valley. The mammoth snowfall in the Northeast of the United States last winter was part of the same pattern.
DROUGHT
Historic drought and fires in Russia killed an estimated 56,000 people and caused wheat and other food crops to be removed from the global market causing a record spike in food prices. This Spring the majority of counties in Texas were on fire, and the governor requested a major disaster declaration for all but 2 of the states 254 counties. Extreme droughts in central China and northern France are now drying up reservoirs and killing crops.
MELTING ICE
An enormous mass of ice, four times larger than the island of Manhattan, broke off from northern Greenland last year and slipped into the sea. The acceleration of ice loss in both Greenland and Antartica has caused another upward revision of global sea-level rise and the numbers of refugees expected from low lying coastal areas. The Arctic ice cap has reached a record low volume last year, and has lost as much as 40 percent of its volume in the last 30 years.
“Many of the extreme and destructive events are the result of the rapid increase in the amount of heat energy from the sun that is trapped in the atmosphere, which is radically disrupting the planet’s water cycle. More heat energy evaporates more water into the air, and the warmer air holds a lot more moisture. This has huge consequences that we now see all around the world.
When a storm unleashes a downpour of rain or snow, the precipitation does not originate just in the part of the sky directly above where it falls. Storms reach out — sometimes as far as 2,000 miles — to suck in water vapor from large areas of the sky, including the skies above oceans, where water vapor has increased by four percent in just the last 30 years. (Scientists often compare this phenomenon to what happens in a bathtub when you open the drain; the water rushing out comes from the whole tub, not just from the part of the tub directly above the drain. And when the tub is filled with more water, more goes down the drain. In the same way, when the warmer sky is filled with a lot more water vapor, there are bigger downpours when a storm cell opens the “drain.”)
In many areas, these bigger downpours also mean longer periods between storms — at the same time that the extra heat in the air is also drying out the soil. That is part of the reason so many areas have been experiencing both record floods and deeper, longer-lasting droughts.
Moreover, the scientists have been warning us for quite some time — in increasingly urgent tones — that things will get much, much worse if we continue the reckless dumping of more and more heat-trapping pollution into the atmosphere. Drought is projected to spread across significant, highly populated areas of the globe throughout this century. Look at what the scientists say is in store for the Mediterranean nations. Should we care about the loss of Spain, France, Italy, the Balkans, Turkey, Tunisia? Look at what they say is in store for Mexico. Should we notice? Should we care?”
“The truth is this: What we are doing is functionally insane. If we do not change this pattern, we will condemn our children and all future generations to struggle with ecological curses for several millennia to come. Twenty percent of the global-warming pollution we spew into the sky each day will still be there 20,000 years from now!”
We do have another choice. Renewable energy sources are coming into their own. Both solar and wind will soon produce power at costs that are competitive with fossil fuels; indications are that twice as many solar installations were erected worldwide last year as compared to 2009. The reductions in cost and the improvements in efficiency of photovoltaic cells over the past decade appear to be following an exponential curve that resembles a less dramatic but still startling version of what happened with computer chips over the past 50 years.
Enhanced geothermal energy is potentially a nearly limitless source of competitive electricity. Increased energy efficiency is already saving businesses money and reducing emissions significantly. New generations of biomass energy — ones that do not rely on food crops, unlike the mistaken strategy of making ethanol from corn — are extremely promising. Sustainable forestry and agriculture both make economic as well as environmental sense. And all of these options would spread even more rapidly if we stopped subsidizing Big Oil and Coal and put a price on carbon that reflected the true cost of fossil energy — either through the much-maligned cap-and-trade approach, or through a revenue-neutral tax swap.
All over the world, the grassroots movement in favor of changing public policies to confront the climate crisis and build a more prosperous, sustainable future is growing rapidly. But most governments remain paralyzed, unable to take action — even after years of volatile gasoline prices, repeated wars in the Persian Gulf, one energy-related disaster after another, and a seemingly endless stream of unprecedented and lethal weather disasters.
Continuing on our current course would be suicidal for global civilization. But the key question is: How do we drive home that fact in a democratic society when questions of truth have been converted into questions of power?”
“The concerns of the wealthiest individuals and corporations routinely trump the concerns of average Americans and small businesses. There are a ridiculously large number of examples: eliminating the inheritance tax paid by the wealthiest one percent of families is considered a much higher priority than addressing the suffering of the millions of long-term unemployed; Wall Street’s interest in legalizing gambling in trillions of dollars of “derivatives” was considered way more important than protecting the integrity of the financial system and the interests of middle-income home buyers. It’s a long list.
Almost every group organized to promote and protect the “public interest” has been backpedaling and on the defensive. By sharp contrast, when a coalition of powerful special interests sets out to manipulate U.S. policy, their impact can be startling — and the damage to the true national interest can be devastating.
In 2002, for example, the feverish desire to invade Iraq required convincing the American people that Saddam Hussein was somehow responsible for attacking the United States on September 11th, 2001, and that he was preparing to attack us again, perhaps with nuclear weapons. When the evidence — the “facts” — stood in the way of that effort to shape the public mind, they were ridiculed, maligned and ignored. Behind the scenes, the intelligence was manipulated and the public was intentionally deceived. Allies were pressured to adopt the same approach with their publics. A recent inquiry in the U.K. confirmed this yet again. “We knew at the time that the purpose of the dossier was precisely to make a case for war, rather than setting out the available intelligence,” Maj. Gen. Michael Laurie testified. “To make the best out of sparse and inconclusive intelligence, the wording was developed with care.” Why? As British intelligence put it, the overthrow of Saddam was “a prize because it could give new security to oil supplies.”
That goal — the real goal — could have been debated on its own terms. But as Bush administration officials have acknowledged, a truly candid presentation would not have resulted in sufficient public support for the launching of a new war. They knew that because they had studied it and polled it. So they manipulated the debate, downplayed the real motive for the invasion, and made a different case to the public — one based on falsehoods.”
“In the same way, because the banks had their way with Congress when it came to gambling on unregulated derivatives and recklessly endangering credit markets with subprime mortgages, we still have almost double-digit unemployment, historic deficits, Greece and possibly other European countries teetering on the edge of default, and the threat of a double-dip recession. Even the potential default of the United States of America is now being treated by many politicians and too many in the media as yet another phony wrestling match, a political game. Are the potential economic consequences of a U.S. default “real”? Of course they are! Have we gone completely nuts?
We haven’t gone nuts — but the “conversation of democracy” has become so deeply dysfunctional that our ability to make intelligent collective decisions has been seriously impaired. Throughout American history, we relied on the vibrancy of our public square — and the quality of our democratic discourse — to make better decisions than most nations in the history of the world. But we are now routinely making really bad decisions that completely ignore the best available evidence of what is true and what is false. When the distinction between truth and falsehood is systematically attacked without shame or consequence — when a great nation makes crucially important decisions on the basis of completely false information that is no longer adequately filtered through the fact-checking function of a healthy and honest public discussion — the public interest is severely damaged.
That is exactly what is happening with U.S. decisions regarding the climate crisis. The best available evidence demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that the reckless spewing of global-warming pollution in obscene quantities into the atmospheric commons is having exactly the consequences long predicted by scientists who have analyzed the known facts according to the laws of physics.
The emergence of the climate crisis seems sudden only because of a relatively recent discontinuity in the relationship between human civilization and the planet’s ecological system. In the past century, we have quadrupled global population while relying on the burning of carbon-based fuels — coal, oil and gas — for 85 percent of the world’s energy. We are also cutting and burning forests that would otherwise help remove some of the added CO2 from the atmosphere, and have converted agriculture to an industrial model that also runs on carbon-based fuels and strip-mines carbon-rich soils.
The cumulative result is a radically new reality — and since human nature makes us vulnerable to confusing the unprecedented with the improbable, it naturally seems difficult to accept. Moreover, since this new reality is painful to contemplate, and requires big changes in policy and behavior that are at the outer limit of our ability, it is all too easy to fall into the psychological state of denial. As with financial issues like subprime mortgages and credit default swaps, the climate crisis can seem too complex to worry about, especially when the shills for the polluters constantly claim it’s all a hoax anyway. And since the early impacts of climatic disruption are distributed globally, they masquerade as an abstraction that is safe to ignore.
These vulnerabilities, rooted in our human nature, are being manipulated by the tag-team of Polluters and Ideologues who are trying to deceive us. And the referee — the news media — is once again distracted. As with the invasion of Iraq, some are hyperactive cheerleaders for the deception, while others are intimidated into complicity, timidity and silence by the astonishing vitriol heaped upon those who dare to present the best evidence in a professional manner. Just as TV networks who beat the drums of war prior to the Iraq invasion were rewarded with higher ratings, networks now seem reluctant to present the truth about the link between carbon pollution and global warming out of fear that conservative viewers will change the channel — and fear that they will receive a torrent of flame e-mails from deniers.
Many politicians, unfortunately, also fall into the same two categories: those who cheerlead for the deniers and those who cower before them. The latter group now includes several candidates for the Republican presidential nomination who have felt it necessary to abandon their previous support for action on the climate crisis; at least one has been apologizing profusely to the deniers and begging for their forgiveness.
“Intimidation” and “timidity” are connected by more than a shared word root. The first is designed to produce the second. As Yeats wrote almost a century ago, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
“Barack Obama’s approach to the climate crisis represents a special case that requires careful analysis. His election was accompanied by intense hope that many things in need of change would change. Some things have, but others have not. Climate policy, unfortunately, is in the second category. Why?
First of all, anyone who honestly examines the incredible challenges confronting President Obama when he took office has to feel enormous empathy for him: the Great Recession, with the high unemployment and the enormous public and private indebtedness it produced; two seemingly interminable wars; an intractable political opposition whose true leaders — entertainers masquerading as pundits — openly declared that their objective was to ensure that the new president failed; a badly broken Senate that is almost completely paralyzed by the threat of filibuster and is controlled lock, stock and barrel by the oil and coal industries; a contingent of nominal supporters in Congress who are indentured servants of the same special interests that control most of the Republican Party; and a ferocious, well-financed and dishonest campaign poised to vilify anyone who dares offer leadership for the reduction of global-warming pollution.”
“President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change. After successfully passing his green stimulus package, he did nothing to defend it when Congress decimated its funding. After the House passed cap and trade, he did little to make passage in the Senate a priority. Senate advocates — including one Republican — felt abandoned when the president made concessions to oil and coal companies without asking for anything in return. He has also called for a massive expansion of oil drilling in the United States, apparently in an effort to defuse criticism from those who argue speciously that “drill, baby, drill” is the answer to our growing dependence on foreign oil.”
“Without presidential leadership that focuses intensely on making the public aware of the reality we face, nothing will change. The real power of any president, as Richard Neustadt wrote, is “the power to persuade.” Yet President Obama has never presented to the American people the magnitude of the climate crisis. He has simply not made the case for action. He has not defended the science against the ongoing, withering and dishonest attacks. Nor has he provided a presidential venue for the scientific community — including our own National Academy — to bring the reality of the science before the public.
Here is the core of it: we are destroying the climate balance that is essential to the survival of our civilization. This is not a distant or abstract threat; it is happening now. The United States is the only nation that can rally a global effort to save our future. And the president is the only person who can rally the United States.
Many political advisers assume that a president has to deal with the world of politics as he finds it, and that it is unwise to risk political capital on an effort to actually lead the country toward a new understanding of the real threats and real opportunities we face. Concentrate on the politics of re-election, they say. Don’t take chances.
All that might be completely understandable and make perfect sense in a world where the climate crisis wasn’t “real.” Those of us who support and admire President Obama understand how difficult the politics of this issue are in the context of the massive opposition to doing anything at all — or even to recognizing that there is a crisis. And assuming that the Republicans come to their senses and avoid nominating a clown, his re-election is likely to involve a hard-fought battle with high stakes for the country. All of his supporters understand that it would be self-defeating to weaken Obama and heighten the risk of another step backward. Even writing an article like this one carries risks; opponents of the president will excerpt the criticism and strip it of context.
But in this case, the President has reality on his side. The scientific consensus is far stronger today than at any time in the past. Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act.
Those who profit from the unconstrained pollution that is the primary cause of climate change are determined to block our perception of this reality. They have help from many sides: from the private sector, which is now free to make unlimited and secret campaign contributions; from politicians who have conflated their tenures in office with the pursuit of the people’s best interests; and — tragically — from the press itself, which treats deception and falsehood on the same plane as scientific fact, and calls it objective reporting of alternative opinions.
All things are not equally true. It is time to face reality. We ignored reality in the marketplace and nearly destroyed the world economic system. We are likewise ignoring reality in the environment, and the consequences could be several orders of magnitude worse. Determining what is real can be a challenge in our culture, but in order to make wise choices in the presence of such grave risks, we must use common sense and the rule of reason in coming to an agreement on what is true.”
“So how can we make it happen? How can we as individuals make a difference? In five basic ways:
First, become a committed advocate for solving the crisis. You can start with something simple: Speak up whenever the subject of climate arises. When a friend or acquaintance expresses doubt that the crisis is real, or that it’s some sort of hoax, don’t let the opportunity pass to put down your personal marker. The civil rights revolution may have been driven by activists who put their lives on the line, but it was partly won by average Americans who began to challenge racist comments in everyday conversations.
Second, deepen your commitment by making consumer choices that reduce energy use and reduce your impact on the environment. The demand by individuals for change in the marketplace has already led many businesses to take truly significant steps to reduce their global-warming pollution. Some of the corporate changes are more symbolic than real — “green-washing,” as it’s called — but a surprising amount of real progress is taking place. Walmart, to pick one example, is moving aggressively to cut its carbon footprint by 20 million metric tons, in part by pressuring its suppliers to cut down on wasteful packaging and use lower-carbon transportation alternatives. Reward those companies that are providing leadership.
Third, join an organization committed to action on this issue. The Alliance for Climate Protection (climateprotect.org), which I chair, has grassroots action plans for the summer and fall that spell out lots of ways to fight effectively for the policy changes we need. We can also enable you to host a slide show in your community on solutions to the climate crisis — presented by one of the 4,000 volunteers we have trained. Invite your friends and neighbors to come and then enlist them to join the cause.
Fourth, contact your local newspapers and television stations when they put out claptrap on climate — and let them know you’re fed up with their stubborn and cowardly resistance to reporting the facts of this issue. One of the main reasons they are so wimpy and irresponsible about global warming is that they’re frightened of the reaction they get from the deniers when they report the science objectively. So let them know that deniers are not the only ones in town with game. Stay on them! Don’t let up! It’s true that some media outlets are getting instructions from their owners on this issue, and that others are influenced by big advertisers, but many of them are surprisingly responsive to a genuine outpouring of opinion from their viewers and readers. It is way past time for the ref to do his job.
Finally, and above all, don’t give up on the political system. Even though it is rigged by special interests, it is not so far gone that candidates and elected officials don’t have to pay attention to persistent, engaged and committed individuals. President Franklin Roosevelt once told civil rights leaders who were pressing him for change that he agreed with them about the need for greater equality for black Americans. Then, as the story goes, he added with a wry smile, “Now go out and make me do it.””
This Blog is linked to Monday Mania , Traditional Tuesdays, Real Food Wednesday
I want to thank you for sharing both your thoughts and the summary/excerpts from the Al Gore climate change piece on your blog. I found it most appropriate, especially as your introductory comments illustrate how “the conversion of all questions of truth into questions of power” applies to the USDA’s food pyramid, a manipulative tool disguised as educational and in the public interest. Regarding global warming, it boggles my mind that so many people remain unconvinced (and adamantly opposed to being convinced, it would seem!) that the actions of human beings are a critical factor. I would like to add another suggestion as to how one might make a difference, not just with the global warming issue, but in general. The internet seems to have become our modern “public square” and no where else is there such rampant disregard for factual information, not to mention critical thinking. The more of us that commit to respond to distressingly idiotic emails being circulated on every subject imaginable by checking and sharing facts with the sender and the other recipients the more impact we can have at a fundamental level. At the very least it must make people aware of their own lack of responsibility concerning the truth. I and a few friends have begun to share our fact based responses to outrageous emails, thus minimizing the time each of us spends on developing responses. I loved the Yeats quote “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” That seems an apt description of what is happening over the internet. So whether is about climate change or some other topic, we would all do well to make a point of at least occasionally confronting lies with the truth, however inconvenient that truth may be.
Susan
AMEN! We all need to raise our voices. Everyone of us. When we hear someone say something that is a lie, we need to confront them and not just let it pass.
We see this happening around the world. In that way its a very exciting time to be alive.
Now finally people here are taking to the streets with Occupy Wall Street. This is a movement which points to the fact that this is not a democracy when public servants can be bought by corporations, when the only prayer they have of getting elected is to take money from special interest groups. Special interest groups promote positions like there is no global warming, or you need to take cholesterol lowering drugs, vegetable oils are more healthful than animal fat, pasturized milk is a healthful bone building drink, healthy whole grains will protect your heart health. The list is absolutely endless and appalling. There is nothing that has to do with the public welfare or health, this is about lining the pockets of a powerful group that is controlling information and therefore the portrayal of reality that is to their financial advantage.
To the skeptics of global warming who do not like Al Gore I suggest the following . Forget Al Gore, the fact that he narrated a movie is irrelevant. The science of global warming confirms a major contribution from green house gases. The polar ice caps are melting, the oceans are warming and rising. These phenomena are observed from weather satellites.
I am a great admirer of Al Gore. He has passionately devoted himself to raising awareness about what is in my mind the greatest most pressing danger of our time. Without a major course correction, we are on the road to making our home irrevocably damaged. It’s an emergency and it’s as Gore said, the climate is one of denial.
Dr. TsaFrir, I enjoy your articles, they are insightful and your topics are well chosen. I hope more people find your articles. Climate change is the huge elephant in the room! Best, Lysa Miller
Thanks, Ms. Miller, I appreciate your support and kind words. Elephant indeed!