Rupert Murdoch: Climate Change "Expert"

     If you like Rupert Murdoch, shame on you. He is one of the billionaire power brokers that has put profits above people and has pushed the modern monopoly movement forward, the likes of which we haven't seen since before Teddy Roosevelt. There is no doubting his business acumen, as evidenced by his massive holdings (Fox, his attempt to buy Time Warner, and others I can't even wrap my head around).


     But, Climate Science? He seems to be either completely misguided or afraid that addressing environmental issues will take a chunk out of his wallet. Murdoch has taken the stance of so many that out there that humans are not having an effect on the climate. He states that the climate has changed since the Earth was created, so that's that. Scientists seem to have an issue with his statements, saying Murdoch is ignoring sound evidence. (Scientists, what do they know about science, right?)

You can read the article here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-16/scientists-take-issue-with-rupert-murdoch-s-remarks-on-climate-change.html

     But like the article says, its the speed with which these changes have taken place over the past 200 years that highly suggests that burning fossil fuels has accelerated changes in the world's climate. We only have ice cores, sediment cores and actual recorded data that covers hundreds of thousands of years!

If you want to understand how these cores tell us this, check out this article on Chemistry World:

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/2013/01/climate-proxies


     The Australian government has just killed the "Carbon Tax" law in that country, and Murdoch says it will help now that the tax is no more. He thinks the tax was an anchor on the Australian economy, putting it at a global disadvantage.

     You know what an even bigger anchor on an economy would be? A 3-5 foot rise in sea level, displacing hundreds of millions of people, all because people like Murdoch want to profit as much as possible right now, to the detriment of the people on this planet in the future. Now, that's an anchor. Wonder how he proposes to deal with that?

Something in the Middle

     I read an article today that I found VERY interesting (yes it was the Huffington Post, but just bear with me). It said that independent studies show that Red States and Blue States agree on more issues then Congress makes it seem. Besides Gay rights, gun control and abortion, most Americans (regardless of political persuasion) see eye to eye on issues in this country and the world. That includes Global Warming and Climate Change.

     You can read the article here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elliott-negin/red-states-are-way-ahead_b_5586451.html

     I found this interesting. It suggests that Congress isn't "...by the people, for the people" anymore. Its about special interests. Its about posturing. And its not doing us any good. When a conservative Republican from Kansas agrees with a bleeding heart liberal from Massachusetts that we are having an effect on #ClimateChange and sees the value and potential of solar arrays, wind power and carbon taxes, doesn't that make you wonder why it isn't portrayed that way in the media? Or in Congress?

     Perhaps the arguments displayed for us to watch and read about are the Far Left vs the Far Right. Which ignores the vast and much larger middle that drives the country, supports its programs and pays for it all. Talk to your neighbors. Have the Climate Conversation. Find out if what I postulate is true. What can it hurt?

Calling All Conservative Tree-Huggers

     My friend Jerry recently pointed out to me that I tend to occasionally bash Conservatives. On this blog, my Facebook page and on Twitter.  (All right, maybe more then occasionally).  I try not to generalize, stereotype or lump those who don't believe me or agree with me together in one big with-me-or-against-me group. But, sometimes it can seem that way. (Or I do it and don't edit my posts with an objective red pen.)

     I have made a conscious effort to keep my crosshairs firmly fixed on those who deny that the human race is having an effect on the Climate, the Environment and the world around us. What many forget is that there are many conservatives out there that love nature and are pragmatic about our effects on the oceans, the air and each other. In order to address the environmental and societal issues facing us, we will need people from all walks of life (religious groups, social classes and political persuasions) to reverse course and steer us toward a healthier environment and a brighter future.

     So, let me make clear, in case I have failed to do so before:

     Those of you who consider yourselves conservatives, with right leanings and beliefs, but recognize that there are better, cleaner and more efficient ways for us live on this planet...my beef is not with you. You may be conservative, but many of you are pragmatists. You see the chance to improve and grow without needless spending, higher taxes and a more efficient government. You see that reducing energy usage saves the hard earned money that people in this country earn, even if being more efficient may cost a little more up front. You are smart enough to realize it pays off down the road.

     You, too, understand that there are consequences to our actions and that human innovation and human ingenuity have the ability to improve, replace and invent betters ways of living on this world that we all share. (Cue the "Kumbaya" music). You understand that cutting off the tops of mountains, spilling oil in the seas and pumping toxic chemicals and greenhouse gases into the air are not ways to maintain a sustainable lifestyle. Some of you are open to Solar and Wind and Geothermal energy sources because they work and have potential, not just to make the air cleaner, but to provide jobs and spur innovation, not to mention that they are solid investments.

     You also bring options and thoughts and ideas to the table to further the discussion. You challenge those seated with you. You insist on logical and factual arguments, not inflated rhetoric. You dismiss conjecture and mis-guided opinion, forcing others to back up what they say with real data and proof. You reign in the passionate and idealistic and help keep the movement grounded and focused on reality.

      My beef is with the people who dismiss what us Environmentalists have to say without a second thought. My beef is with those who ignore the studies and data and arguments, supported with proof and facts and research obtained though hard work and due diligence. My beef is with those "Deniers" who are close-minded and deaf to anyone's ideas other then their own, regardless of what the numbers show or what records indicate. THOSE are the people I have a beef with, not with someone who merely considers or calls themselves conservative without actually adhering to and following the guidelines that entails.

     I care about how we are going to leave this planet for my kids and yours...and would appreciate it if you didn't ridicule me for it. I want to connect with, reach out to and encourage as many people as I can to take a step back and really consider what's happening right now. I want others to realize that there are other ways to power our society, besides burning gasoline and coal. I want everyone to understand my beliefs and why I stand for them, without them having to give up who they are and what they believe in. Too idealistic? Perhaps. But pushing for the unobtainable ideal is what lifted the Wright brothers at Kitty-Hawk, enabled men to walk on the surface of the moon and reversed the deterioration of the o-zone layer.

     I went to my friend Jerry while I was writing this and asked for his input. It was an olive branch. I needed to reach out to make sure that what I was trying to say would indeed reach the audience I was trying to reach: the Conservative Tree-Huggers that I may have alienated or turned off during my diatribes. Of course, Jerry wanted me to invoke the precedent of Ronald Reagan. My first reaction was to say no, but I gave it some thought. It was Reagan, after all, who appealed to more then just his Republican party by insisting that they have a "very big tent" to include they views of many in order to be attractive to those fence sitters between Red and Blue. That is what led to his immense popularity and success.

     That's what I am trying to do here; reach out to as many different people as I can to raise awareness about how we treat this planet. I do not want to change your opinion; I want to hear your opinions. I want to have a conversation with you; I do not want to lecture you.  I want to connect, not by throwing in Ronald Reagan references in a cheap way to get you to listen, but to show you that I am as open minded as I claim to be. Reagan knew that the most success is achieved when important, peripheral causes become mainstream. No matter where you stand, the logic in that is too hard to ignore.