New PBS documentary 'Climate of Doubt' looks at organizations fueling doubt in climate change | PRI.ORG

New PBS documentary 'Climate of Doubt' looks at organizations fueling doubt in climate change

Home | Stories | Science and Technology | Environment | New PBS documentary 'Climate of Doubt' looks at organizations fueling doubt in climate change
email

Email to a friend

 
image
Climate of Doubt, from PBS Frontline, will look at how what was an accepted reality, global climate change, has become politically inconvenient. (Photo from Climate of Doubt.)

Four years ago, there was political consensus that climate change was one of the most pressing issues facing the world and the U.S. But now, after a great deal of spending and lobbying, politicians are refusing to do anything about it. A new documentary looks at why.


Listen NowListen Now

Just a few years ago, climate change was widely considered an "inconvenient truth" — something that would likely be expensive and difficult to fix, but an issue that nearly all politicians felt compelled to reckon with.

In the 2008 election, Republicans and Democrats alike talked about global warming as one of the most pressing problems our nation faced. But in 2012, climate change has all but evaporated as a political issue. In Monday's night's debate, it got nary a mention.

In a new documentary from Frontline, Climate of Doubt, premiering Tuesday on PBS, investigates the organizations that challenged the science, and all but took climate change off the table of political discourse.

Coral Davenport, energy and environment correspondent for the National Journal, says climate change is the biggest, global, economic and political problem — but it's just not on the American political radar.

"I would argue ... it all kept coming back again and again to the Citizens United Supreme Court Decision, which essentially changed the political conversation. It changed the way we do campaigning. It changed the way issues get talked about," she said.

In essence, businesses that would be most hurt by any climate change legislation, fossil fuel businesses, were given permission to spend as much money as they could to try and make people doubt climate change's existence.

Watch Climate of Doubt on PBS. See more from FRONTLINE.

"They feel like they're fighting for their lives, and they have the means to flood the airwaves to do tremendous campaigns to change public opinion about climate change," she said.

Though 98 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real, and mostly human-caused, groups like the Heartland Institute and the Americans for Prosperity have not only called these claims into doubt, but continually framed politicians and scientists who believe in climate change as alarmists or conspirators. They say the science "isn't settled," and that the consensus on global warming is not a scientific consensus, but a political one. 

By challenging the consensus, these groups have made climate change seem like one of many theories. Politicians like Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrinch, who just a few years ago reached across the aisle to join Democrats in saying that climate change was a serious issue that needed attention, have now taken to saying that the science on climate change is inconclusive.

Even President Barack Obama has been quiet on the issue. The skeptics are more than happy to take credit for this change — they see it as American freedom and democracy triumphing over a liberal conspiracy.

Bill McKibben, an environmentalist and author, said climate change has real consequences for us — and the consequences are right now. Droughts, floods and other weather disasters have hit across the country, and McKibben atributes much of that to climate change.

"We broke the Arctic this summer. It melted on a scale no one had ever seen before," he said.

But McKibben said that's had the consequence of bringing Americans back to where they were some four years ago: largely believing that climate change is a reality.

"What's lacking is the political leadership," he said. "They don't respond to any of that concern from citizens because the amount of money being poured into the political system by the fossil fuel industry just has no precedent at all."

-----------------------------------------------

"The Takeaway" is a national midday news magazine that features unique conversations about topics of the day with both newsmakers and diverse voices. The show is a co-production of WNYC and PRI, in editorial collaboration with the BBC, The New York Times Radio, and WGBH Radio Boston.

Found in:   climate change   environment   elections   politics
email

Email to a friend

 

Subscribe to comments feed Comments (17 posted)

avatar
R Sharpe 23 October, 2012 09:23:57
And maybe it's because the public has found that 'Climate Science' is a myth. The earth IS warming, but due to macro natural and cyclical factors beyond our control. The idea of 'man-made' gw has been found to be nothing but a sham for research cash and unequivocally bad science (models that have crap put in get crap out...surprise, surprise!).
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
-2
avatar
carl 23 October, 2012 04:41:42
and there you have it. a prime example of the political genus 'headin the sandus' every scientific association in the world disagrees with you except the petroleum institutes of canada and america. your insistence the climate changes aren't man induced flies in the face of insurmountable data.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
4
avatar
R Sharpe 23 October, 2012 09:25:07
And maybe because 'Climate science' has been shown to be a sham for second and third tier researchers scrounging for cash.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
-4
avatar
jim 23 October, 2012 10:02:56
Though 98 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real, and mostly human-caused


Not true. There are many scientists, their numbers augmented with each passing day, who are willing to speak-out that carbon, anthropogenic or other, is not the culprit. Unfortunately, it's a classic catch-22 situation, since your funding will disappear.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
3
avatar
Jeremy 24 October, 2012 01:43:22
Science doesn't work the same as politics. There is no debate based on opinion, everything is grounded on scientific research based on the best evidence out there. When 97-98% of climate scientists active in their research say global warming is real and humans play a role, there is a consensus among the scientific community...meaning, there is no debate, other than the severity and implications as a result of climate change and it's impact on this planet.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
2
avatar
JJ 23 October, 2012 10:17:06
Actually what's lacking are accurate computer models with open access to data, non-cherry-picked polling of "experts", and a reasoned explanation of what the ideal global temperature is and why.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
-3
avatar
cmon 23 October, 2012 11:16:06
I'm sure you're well aware of this before you wrote the article; you sound like a smart guy
but I'm going to have to put it to you again:

If Obama talks about Climate Change in these debates, then the people will elect Romney.
At some point you have to acknowledge the state of affairs in this country. The people don't care.

If YOU care, then you'd do well to mention Obama's vast accomplishments re climate change despite total opposition in the House on every single step.
By ignoring this truth, you do nothing to further the venue of people like Obama who are the only ones doing anything about this problem.

It's your choice.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
0
avatar
mk 23 October, 2012 11:35:15
In the minority in these comments, I trust the science behind concern about climate change.
As for the $, there's millions to be had from the Koch brothers, oil companies and the right wing for climate change denying scientists. Polar bears, coral reefs and drought stricken farmers don't have big backers.
The scale and scope of human activity is immense, sustained and altering. How can that be denied?
Galileo was held under house arrest til he died for the heresy of his finding that the earth was not the center of the universe. Denying climate change is akin to what passed for conventional wisdom way back then. Perhaps, after all, Galileo was wrong... and we are the center of the universe.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
2
avatar
jim 23 October, 2012 01:30:08
To mk...you have it backwards with your Galileo analogy. The "conventional wisdom" of today is that global warming is anthropogenic.

The brave voices that are speaking out against this (warped) conventional wisdom are akin to Galileo!
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
2
avatar
rw 23 October, 2012 04:36:11
If this PBS report is serious, it will note that Met Office data indicates no warming of the earth over the past 16 years. And it will note that NOAA tide station data shows that sea level rise is slowing down, and in places like the California coast has actually dropped below the levels of the 1990s. And that serious minds interprete this data points in differing ways, which is reasonable to expect among thinking adults. But is PBS for thinking adults?
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
0
avatar
A. Payne 23 October, 2012 05:26:22
Quick poll: Among those commenting, who is a scientist currently researching, or at least academically familiar with, climate science?

Another quick poll: Who gets their information from quacks on the web? or worse, from politicians or political talk shows?
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
-2
avatar
DF 23 October, 2012 07:00:45
Not so rw. The Daily Mail is hardly a sound source. "If you were engaging in social media this past weekend, you might have found an October 13, 2012 article suggesting that global warming stopped 16 years ago. The article is here. David Rose of the Daily Mail wrote it. The article says the UK Met Office sent out a news release release saying its data showed that global warming has stopped and that there is no “discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.” It now comes to light that this information is not true. The UK Met Office did not release a statement suggesting that “global warming stopped 16 years ago.” The UK Met Office, in fact, disavows any association with Mr. Rose and his article and says it was never asked any questions regarding the actual science of climate change and global warming by Mr. Rose. On October 14, 2012 – one day after Mr. Rose’s article appeared in the Daily Mail – the UK Met Office released its own blog post discussing the issues with the Daily Mail article. It’s very interesting reading." From Earthsky.org
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
3
avatar
Jeremy 24 October, 2012 01:35:20
And yet thousands of articles reporting on scientific findings which support the stance on climate science among the majority of scientists goes ignored by the right-wing media. They pick and choose what they want to hear.
Reply Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
3
1 2 next total: 14 | displaying: 1 - 10

Post your comment

    Bold Italic Underline Quote

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Captcha
Follow Listen Support PRI's Global Reporting: Important Stories Powerful Storytelling
Rate this article
3.00
Support PRI's Global Reporting: Important Stories Powerful Storytelling