John Hill writes that we can all agree that the nation is divided on the issue of climate change (Letters, Herald, Dec. 2). I can agree that there is a counter-movement of climate change denial. However, the fossil fuel industries and many conservative and right wing foundations heavily fund it.
Why? Vested interests. Koch Industries, Exxon and other corporations want to continue polluting. The foundations advocate free market enterprise, and know that actions taken to reduce air pollution will require regulations.
The scientific evidence that current global climate warming is caused primarily by human activity (anthropogenic) is overwhelming. Most scientists who actually study climate agree with this premise. Hill’s letter provides us with excellent examples of the potential conflicts of interest that permeate the climate change countermovement.
First is the website climatedepot.com, a conservative site funded by Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which has received a total of $582 million from Exxon Mobile since 1998.
Second are three prominent scientists (Lindzen, Happer, Moore) who spoke at a recent Climate Change Summit in Austin, Texas. The Texas Public Policy Foundation, a libertarian think tank that promotes free enterprise in Texas, sponsored the meeting. The scientists, who receive funding from the fossil fuel industries, believe human activity plays no role in the current climate change.
Patrick Moore worked with Greenpeace in the 1980s but left to form a company that lobbies for the fossil fuel and logging industries. Greenpeace states he is not a co-founder of Greenpeace, he simply gives that impression.
I cannot say these or other well-known people in the climate change countermovement are charlatans. They may be genuine believers. However, the perception that vested-interest money influences their belief is very real.
As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” And as Marshall McLuhan observed, “A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding.” The countermovement should be exposed for what it is if based on disinformation that is self-serving.
Glenn E. Rodey
Hesperus
