Skip to content

Looks like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck?

Rosemary Mosco
© Rosemary Mosco

I think this comic is being too kind — “greedy narcissistic sociopath” would be more accurate.

Scientists are in almost total agreement that climate change is caused by human activity, and that it will have disastrous consequences. It is already costing us billions of dollars. Anyone who denies this, just to get money from donors or to kiss up to the tea party in order to get elected is like a cancer on this country.

Share

4 Comments

  1. Ralph wrote:

    Dana Milbank’s op-ed in today’s WP suggests denier groups appear to be gradually, if grudgingly, reassessing their stance, if only to (ironically) retain their industry sponsors. As usual, it’s money that moves the needle.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/climate-change-deniers-are-in-retreat/2015/04/06/942eb980-dc9f-11e4-be40-566e2653afe5_story.html

    The million dollar question is whether anything we manage to do at this point on a global scale would be enough to turn the tide, so to speak. Some experts contend we may already be beyond the point of no return, in terms of avoiding some of the catastrophic consequences involving droughts, flooding and other severe weather events. Only time will tell, of course.

    Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 8:56 am | Permalink
  2. Iron Knee wrote:

    That is great news. Thanks for the link, Ralph.

    Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 9:27 am | Permalink
  3. ThatGuy wrote:

    Keep in mind that the winter was still the country’s 19th warmest on record, despite some eastern states having winters ranking in the top 20 coldest (none within the top 10 coldest winters, however). One unusually chilly February was enough to convince a lot of northeasterners of the comic’s sentiment though!

    http://www.weather.com/news/climate/news/warmest-winter-coldest-february-2015

    Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 9:34 am | Permalink
  4. redjon wrote:

    Being interested in where the colors on the cartoon came from, I spent a few (ONLY a few, as it didn’t take long) and found the same analysis on the NOAA website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

    The question is, depending on which way your confirmation bias weathervane points, whether NOAA is a credible source.

    Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 2:19 pm | Permalink