Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumWith those in power wedded to fossil fuels, the world needs a stronger pro-science mass movement to drive climate action
During the hot summer of 1988, as swaths of Yellowstone National Park burned, we vacationed on the Oregon Coast. I took our standard poodle for a cool morning stroll on an ocean beach. The wet, sandy, happy hound then joined me in feeling the heat from The Today Show, a longtime morning fixture at NBC. Jolly weather forecaster Willard Scott was showing sobering heat wave maps.
We were in only one of two places in America far north Maine and the Northwest Coast below ninety degrees Fahrenheit.
The 1988 presidential campaign was meanwhile heating up across the country. The heat was widely predicted to be a major fall campaign issue.
It didnt end up being so, even though White House hopeful Governor Michael Dukakis, the Democratic nominee, made a photo op stop at Yellowstone. Instead, an escaped Massachusetts rapist, Willie Horton, took center stage.
Thirty-seven years have passed. The stakes and the gravity of the threat should be clear. After all, we are hot and choking in fire smoke. But no again. Our summers are such that I could drive six hundred-plus miles from Seattle to Canmore, Alberta, with smoke every mile of the way. Come fall, climate retreats as an issue.
https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2025/08/with-those-in-power-wedded-to-fossil-fuels-the-world-needs-a-stronger-pro-science-mass-movement-to-drive-climate-action.html?jetpack_skip_subscription_popup

cachukis
(3,400 posts)They will escape the frying pan into the fire. We won't.
NNadir
(36,410 posts)...on climate that ignores the fact that science relies on the analysis of something called "data."
I was very annoyed some years back when I went to a "pro-science" demonstration where as we marched toward the state Capitol the chant broke out as follows:
"WHAT DO WE WANT?!?"
The response:
"RENEWABLE ENERGY!"
"WHEN DO WE WANT IT?!?"
"NOW!!!!"
Um, um, um....
There is no data that suggests that so called "renewable energy" has anything to do with addressing the extreme global heating now observed on a planetary scale. It has more to do with faith. Fondness for it has very little to do with science. In fact this fondness was totally a function of attacking the only novel form of primary energy discovered in centuries by some of the finest scientists of the 20th century, nuclear energy.
Before parading enthusiasm for science one should understand something about what science is. It's connected intimately with data.
Again there is no data to support the reactionary fondness for solar and wind energy which has been subject to human employ for millennia has anything at all to do with addressing extreme global heating. They were increasingly abandoned in the 19th and 20th century for a reason, that being they could no longer accommodate neither the needs nor the whims of humanity.
The data behind the existence of extreme global heating is unambiguous. It's is also unambiguously clear that nothing effective is being done to address it. You know the cliché: "Doing the same thing over and over..."