Climate change deniers: let's connect the dots, shall we?

The Attack on Climate-Change Science
Why It’s the O.J. Moment of the Twenty-First Century
By Bill McKibben
February 25, 2010

"...Not surprisingly, perhaps, the latest poll on the American public’s attitude toward climate change shows startling drops in the belief in the very existence of climate change, in humanity's role in causing it, and in its import for the planet: a 14-point drop since October 2008 in Americans who believe climate change is happening at all (to 57%), a 10-point drop in those who believe that human activity is at the root of the problem (to 47%), and a 13-point drop in those who claim to be “somewhat” or “very” worried about the problem (to 50%). .."

Americans are affected by spin, because many don't know any better. They don't understand how news delivery gets paid for. The big money runs with any doubt. The same thing helps them win in the court room over and over again. That is my opinion, based on years of looking up how the news is delivered; TV is expensive, somebody sponsors it, finding out who owns what , and using a bit of common sense. And oh yeah, these guys helped...a LOT. So did figuring out that more often than not, the congress is bought and paid for by large corporate interests in the form of campaign contributions.

"...So let’s figure out how to talk about it. Let’s look at Exxon Mobil, which each of the last three years has made more money than any company in the history of money. Its business model involves using the atmosphere as an open sewer for the carbon dioxide that is the inevitable byproduct of the fossil fuel it sells. And yet we let it do this for free. It doesn't pay a red cent for potentially wrecking our world

Right now, there’s a bill in the Congress -- cap-and-dividend, it’s called -- that would charge Exxon for that right, and send a check to everyone in the country every month. Yes, the company would pass on the charge at the pump, but 80% of Americans (all except the top-income energy hogs) would still make money off the deal. That represents good science, because it starts to send a signal that we should park that SUV, but it’s also good politics...."

Read the Economist article, it's the last link in the last copied paragraph of McKibben's article ( ↑ ).