Climate Change Denial on the Road to Destruction

The campaign against climate science has been enormously clever, and enormously effective. It’s worth trying to understand how they’ve done it. The best analogy, I think, is to the O.J. Simpson trial, an event that’s begun to recede into our collective memory. For those who were conscious in 1995, however, I imagine that just a few names will make it come back to life. Kato Kaelin, anyone? Lance Ito?

The Dream Team of lawyers assembled for Simpson’s defense had a problem: it was pretty clear their guy was guilty. Nicole Brown’s blood was all over his socks, and that was just the beginning. So Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro, Alan Dershowitz, F. Lee Bailey, Robert Kardashian et al. decided to attack the process, arguing that it put Simpson’s guilt in doubt, and doubt, of course, was all they needed. Hence, those days of cross-examination about exactly how Dennis Fung had transported blood samples, or the fact that Los Angeles detective Mark Fuhrman had used racial slurs when talking to a screenwriter in 1986.
Bill McKibbon, Tomdispatch [excerpt]

It is easier to deny climate change than it is to come to terms with it. 85% of the lobbyists who work on the issue call climate change a hoax. Backing them are the corporate giants that have caused much of the pollution behind the change. To them,it is more profitable to conduct wars to seize dwindling resources than it is to clean up the environment.

Thus, climate change denial is a two-edged sword. Eventually, pollution will make the Earth inhospitable to mankind. Nuclar wars fought for scarce resources could act as a short-cut to Armageddon.