Moving Towards Solutions: Science, Politics, Policy

“Climate Change is not politics, it is science”. I say this because understanding science, or at least respecting the experts, is an essential first step in any logical decision analysis. But politics has its role in any solution needing governmental intervention. Solutions are laid out in policy and policy is the result of politics.

When politicians do not respect experts, disaster ensues. The weak response from the Trump Administration to COVID-19 is an example of what happens when politicians ignore experts. Scientists told us the virus must feed on our lungs. If we starve the virus of our lungs, we kill it. To do this effectively, we needed a strong national lock down for a minimum of three weeks. The success of this draconian measure would have been measured by the continuous monitoring of COVID-19 cases. Data gates of declining infestations, set by the epidemiologists, gave us goals to meet before reopening societal contacts.

Their scientific advice was rejected. The virus, which could have been our prey by sticking to a starve ‘em battle plan, is once again the predator, preying on our lungs. We are losing this battle because, unlike the rest of the world, the current Republican politicians either do not know enough about

science, or they do not respect the scientist.

Climate science is different in only a few respects. The most obvious is it is slow to become lethal. Unfortunately, we have wasted a lot of time. Here are two milestones we should have paid attention to. On 5 November, 1965, the group now known as the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) cautioned President Lyndon B. Johnson that continued accumulation of atmospheric carbon dioxide resulting from fossil-fuel burning would “almost certainly cause significant changes” and “could be deleterious from the point of view of human beings.”AAAS.

By 1992 the climate threat was obvious, and the world scientific community came together at the Rio Earth Summit. It was the best chance to save us from the lethal consequences of human caused climate change. Instead of joining in concert with the scientific community, whose guiding light was the greatest good for the greatest number of people, President Bush acquiesced to the politics of his previous Chief of Staff and New Hampshire Chair of the Republican Party, John Sununu. Sununu’s political ambitions, as the Counselor to the President, trampled on science-based decision making. At the Rio Earth Summit we walked out on the rest of the world and we turned our backs on the future of subsequent generations.

Here is how James Hansen, the world-renowned climate scientist viewed the sordid decision making of 1992, "The Framework Convention on Climate Change, the product of Rio in 1992, was exactly the right response to all that was revealed in the 1980s. The elder Bush deserves much credit for that. He was being pushed in a very bad direction by the elder Sununu, a real jackass from my perspective as a scientist."

We are now paying the price for subverting science to selfish political interests. Here is the latest from NOAA: The world’s five warmest years have all occurred since 2015 with nine of the 10 warmest years occurring since 2005.

If Las Vegas let us put bet on 2020’s heat standing, I would put my money on it becoming the warmest year on record. The fact is we are warming faster than scientists ever imagined.

On an optimistic front, the word has been spreading to a few politicians. The U.S. Democratic Party has

acknowledged the critical nature of our predicament. They joined every other major world political party by acknowledging the science and starting to float ideas.

In contrast, the US Republican Party has remained unconvinced, unmoved, and alone. It is the only

political party in the world to reject the science. This puts the Republican Party in a vulnerable position.

Young people know science and they know they are the ones who will pay the piper for our global warming ignorance. They will not forget who is responsible as the mercury inevitably climbs.

Conservatism should not be subjected to this ridiculousness. Barring a massive volcanic eruption or

a giant meteor strike we are going to get a lot hotter if we do not make the energy transition away from fossil fuels.

The logical flow of decision making is to do the science-based studies, identify the threat, listen to the

experts, and then hash out a plan of action. Hashing out a plan is where politics is required to create policy.

Instead the Republican party continues to preach “Zombie Theories” trying to discredit the science. They are called Zombie theories in the science community because one by one the theories are crushed by reputable scientists only to be resurrected from the grave with the scientists having to explain the facts to us, again.

Climate science is the most studied issue in the history of human civilization. We under appreciate the hard work of scientists and their commitment to truth.

Unfortunately, the rejection of science, by some elements in our society, has deeper roots than we realize. Here is what Isaac Asimov has to say, “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Democracy does not mean this. It means each of us is a responsible citizen and our fate is tied to our knowledge and our morals.

There is no honor in being a climate denialist. How much courage does it take to support a false ideology whose unsupportable assertions do not endanger the denier, but have the potential to destroy future generations?

Republican politicians have been attacking the science without a single defensible argument since 1989. That is a long time to hold onto a lie.

Honorable Conservatism does not attack science for political gain nor for any other selfish purpose. Conservatives deserve a better home than the Republican Party. The conservative home I envision is

one that respects science, stands by conservative values, and takes a seat at the table eager to find

solutions.

Time Magazine’s July 26th edition covers the climate crisis and the election this Fall. It is aptly titled, “ONE LAST CHANCE”. We might want to think about how we will be remembered. Certainly, not how John H. Sununu will be remembered.

Additional Information:

*Prior to the Rio Earth Summit, the best opportunity to curb climate change was the in 1989. Scientists and ministers from 68 countries met in Noordwijk, Netherlands. Called the “Ministerial Conference on
Atmospheric Pollution and Climate Change”, its scientifically agreed upon purpose was to freeze emissions world-wide. John H Sununu, as George H W Bush’s Chief of Staff, was instrumental in sabotaging the scientists.

This was a prelude to the Rio Earth Summit. Knowing their fossil fuel profits were in jeopardy, the oil and gas company’s well-funded efforts to create doubt in science were ramped up in time to scuttle the Rio Earth Summit.

Pulitzer link to a condensed order of events:

https://pulitzercenter.org/sites/default/files/losing_earth_full_text_summary_2.pdf

Book by Nathaniel Rich: Losing Earth. He also wrote an article by the same name in the New York Times Magazine.

Understanding how industry and political parties can, and have, undermined our understanding: “Merchants of Doubt” by Naomi Oereskes and Erik M Conway. This is both a book and a documentary. Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8ii9zGFDtc