Why I Don’t Debate Climate Change

---

Support CleanTechnica's work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe.

---

I no longer debate global warming and climate change. When I’m confronted with a denier, I ask how either of us, not being experts in the field, could ever hope to resolve a climate science debate? Nothing gets accomplished and this usually shuts down deniers completely. If they keep going, I ask who benefits if climate change is not occurring? Of course, we know the fossil fuel (FF) industry is the big winner. Individuals in a climate debate, regardless of side, gain very little if anything.

Here’s what I ask:

If you had shortness of breath, would you get an exam and the advice of a doctor or the advice of people who had no background in medicine?

If 97% of doctors told you that you need to change your diet, lose weight, reduce your cholesterol, and exercise, would you listen to them or the 3% who said don’t do anything and not to worry?

And when it keeps getting worse, would you still listen to the 3% who said not to worry?

It’s just common sense. I take the advice of the scientists working in the field every day, not a news program with an agenda. It’s not a political issue, it’s a scientific issue.

I recently had a debate with a FF investor. He had all the info on climate change — it was very biased and non-scientific individuals probably thought it was accurate and climate change is a hoax. Once I saw what was happening, I shut it down. I told him I don’t debate climate change, I debate pollution and its massive cost to the environment and human lives. The FF industry cannot deny pollution. Climate deniers can not deny pollution. And the investor had nowhere to go.

“Air pollution exposure contributes to one in eight deaths around the globe, according to estimates released Tuesday (March 25) by the World Health Organization.”

Wars, their massive cost, and the pollution from them are skillfully hidden by the FF industry. I was surprised at how many individuals I’ve talked to have no idea about this.

“According to the infamous Project for a New American Century (PNAC) document endorsed by senior Bush administration officials as far back as 1997, ‘While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification’ for the US ‘to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security,’ ‘the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'”

I talk about oil spills.

“Fact 1: Iraqi forces intentionally released over 300 million gallons of oil into the Persian Gulf in 1991 as part of the offensive in the Gulf War.

“Fact 2: The Deepwater Horizon, an oil rig located in the Gulf of Mexico, exploded in April of 2010. This is one of BPs biggest oil disasters. The explosion dumped 210 million gallons of oil. The effect on the Gulf of Mexico and surrounding communities is felt to this day.”

I talk about funding terrorism.

The cost and pollution from wars to protect oil interests.

Pollution from extraction.

Pollution from transportation and distribution.

Acid rain.

Smog.

The cost and pollution of building and maintaining internal combustion engines (ICE).

Then I talk about electric vehicles (EVs) and renewables, diversification of the grid through renewables that strengthens and buffers it from terrorism. Then I do a cost analysis with their ICE and an EV.

Yes, climate change is a major problem, but we can change minds by focusing on important issues and not falling into the go-nowhere climate change debate that can only benefit the FF industry. Doubt is their friend — the tobacco industry still uses it to their advantage. The FF industry learned the tactic very well, paying scientists to create doubt. You can’t create doubt about pollution — the data is overwhelming and has been too long accepted by society.

EVs and renewables are just better, safer, more diversified, and cleaner. We have so much info and good data that we don’t have to play the FF diversion game. Don’t let the FF industry play you.

Debate pollution.

Debate the massive hidden costs of FF and their burden to society.

Debate what’s better. EVs and renewables are technology rich, batteries will only get better, storage will only improve, ranges increase, and costs drop. 2017 has given us a glimpse of what’s to come — the world is changing, and renewables are now a big part of the future of the planet.

Debating pollution addresses climate change. If we work to reduce pollution, we work to reduce climate change.

The world is moving to EVs and renewables. Any industrial nation that hopes to compete on the 21st century world stage must aggressively embrace renewable energy.

Debate that!