Deny Global Warming, Go to Jail

…almost.

Seen in the Guardian:

James Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

You know, if you were going to seek to have a sensational trial to end a perceived travesty, perhaps effort would better spent elsewhere.  Maybe we ought to have a “high crimes” trial for educational leaders for failing to teach their students logic and critical thinking, for example.

First some background for readers who haven’t heard me ramble on about global warming and climate change before – I believe that climate change is a threat to society.  I can accept that climate change may be influenced by human activity.  However, I do not subscribe to the global warming hype of the past decade, and instead think it’s far more likely that any climate weirdness we have perceived is the result of longer-term weather cycles, increased awareness of global weather, etc. than “real” global warming.

Despite my skepticism in global warming hype, I like and support many of the measures being advocated by climate change activists.  While they may not impact the long-term climate cycles we barely understand, conservation and sustainability are good ideas, I think, on their own merits.

Global warming activists like James Hansen remind me a bit of George W. Bush and the run-up to the Iraq war.

Back in 2001 and 2002, there were some decent reasons to seek the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.  The crimes committed against his people, the rampant corruption around sanctions loopholes meant to ensure access to food and necessary supplies in spite of international embargo, the ecological damage being done in a sensitive part of the world, the failure to live up to the agreements which lead to the cease-fire after the Gulf War of ‘91.

However, Bush, seeking to drum up support for the war, used the hot-button of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, to play upon Americans’ post-9/11 fears to generate support for war.

We went to Iraq, overthrew Saddam….and realized that Bush administration had mislead us to reach that point.   American credibility was ruined, and achieving some of the still-worthwhile goals of regime change have been severely aggravated with the fallout from that deception and betrayal.

I don’t think that Hansen and others are intentionally trying to mislead the people of the world.  However, they are evangelists, who seem to believe in the cause of Global Warming without critically challenging and re-testing their beliefs.

The world would be a far better place, I think, if folks like that would occasionally take a pause and ask, “what if I’m wrong?”.

Assume for a moment that Hansen’s call to put oil company execs on trial for crimes against humanity actually had legs, and was successful.  

What if he’s wrong?

Could the sensationalism of such a trial, perhaps accompanied by a brief stint of global cooling (Solar Cycle 24 is still missing, after all), cause everything associated with Global Warming to fall into public disrepute?

That would be a shame since, as I’ve said before, conservation and sustainability are good for reasons beyond attempting to combat climate change.

Perhaps rather than seeking oil executive blood, climate change activists would be more effective by expending energy on expanding their message through the use of logic and reason, rather than attempting to sell it with high-profile temper-tantrums.