More than half a century of climate change denial, fed by various powerful lobbies, has been swallowed whole by idiots who, for various reasons, insist there’s nothing to worry about. You have to be pretty stupid to continue denying climate change in the face of the evidence, but just how many types climate change deniers are out there? Which dumb excuses do these so-called skeptics use to justify their denial of reality?
The first, and undoubtedly the most abundant, is the flat out denial of the evidence of what we can see around us. This is the result of all those lobbyists’ years of hard work spreading lies and casting doubt on the evidence. These characters like to talk about “unproven hypotheses” (when, in reality, there is total consensus among the scientific community), who refer to press articles quoting “dissidents” (in reality, laypeople expressing an opinion) or even authors who have been properly categorized as academically dishonest. They insist that “scientists have been wrong before”, when the reality is that models from half a century ago already correctly predicted the current climate emergency. These geniuses also like to play the victim on Twitter when called out: “You’re saying I’m an idiot because I think differently, and that’s disrespectful” — when, in reality, the real proof of their idiocy is their inability to distinguish between simple opinions and scientific facts.
The second category is more serious, because of its implicit selfishness: economic denial. These people claim we can’t fight the climate emergency because it means throwing away the privileges and comfort we have accrued through the use of highly polluting industries. These people ignore the fact that the oil industry receives $5.5 trillion a year in subsidies, 6% of the world’s GDP. So it makes more sense to continue consuming subsidized gasoline and diesel until we destroy our habitat and become extinct. Anybody who suggests changing our economic model, is rubbished as a Marxist or part of some global conspiracy. Replacing obsolete technology or redesigning our cities and banning cars from certain areas is an attack on some sort of sacrosanct freedoms.
The third type of climate emergency denial is particularly slippery: it insists that doing anything would be so expensive in humanitarian terms, that it would be unethical to even consider taking any action, and that elites in the West have an agenda to keep the rest of the planet in a state of under-development. Their so-called arguments are based on claims such as: “carbon dioxide is good because the plants we grow need it,” or that fighting the climate emergency would cause famines, or that it is “completely impossible” to feed and heat the world’s population with renewable sources. When, in reality, what will really kill people, especially the 40% of the planet who live in tropical areas, will be the unfeasibility of certain crops and the devastating heat waves they will produce, together with the greater incidence of catastrophes such as fires, hurricanes, floods, etc. which, “have always been there.” These dimwits ignore the fact that millions of people around the world die each year from respiratory diseases. They bolster their arguments by saying that renewables alone cannot meet our energy needs, ignoring Swanson’s law and the constant improvements in battery technology, or claiming that lithium will create as many problems as oil: firstly, it doesn’t create any pollution, it doesn’t get burnt, and secondly, it is recyclable.
The fourth type of climate emergency denial is based on nationalism. “Why should we do anything: nobody else is?” What we need to do is force all countries to act, whether by threatening to exclude them from global trade or by exerting pressure through international organizations and agreements. Despite the evidence that creating and developing a new green economy could generate wealth and jobs, these chumps insist that “we can’t change our economic system” when it is actually the system itself that is now unpractical. These are the same kind of arguments that have been trotted out in the context of racism, slavery, universal suffrage or equal rights for homosexuals. If we’d paid any attention to these kinds of people, the world would never have evolved. They’re happy to spread their message of idiocy on Twitter, saying that things are just fine as they are, thank you very much, and then insult anybody who suggest that we could change things for the better.
Finally, there are the procrastinators. They accept that we have a problem, but that now isn’t the right moment, and that its best to wait a bit longer until the technology is better developed. For these idiots the climate emergency is part of some kind of agenda and that we can do something about it down the road, just by pressing a button; “no need to panic, all those the reports are exaggerated”. The reality is that we have almost run out of time, and if we continue listening to these people, we actually will, and then it really will be too late to act.
There’s a whole army of climate change deniers out there. Having read this, anybody who felt insulted by my previous article now knows which idiot tribe they belong to. Go ahead and laugh at Greta or criticize here: it doesn’t matter, she’s a symptom of the problem, she’s a symbol and has the power of a symbol. In short, if you’ve heard any of the comments in quotation marks above, you know you’re talking to an idiot. Take the necessary measures.
(En español, aquí)