The Heartland Institute has launched a billboard campaign that compares people who acknowledge the scientific consensus on global warming to criminals and terrorists, such as Unabomber Ted Kaczynski.
The Institute, a right-wing “think tank” funded by, among others, billionaire right-wing activists David and and Charles Koch, explains how the people featured on the billboards were selected:
“The billboard series features Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber; Charles Manson, a mass murderer; and Fidel Castro, a tyrant. Other global warming alarmists who may appear on future billboards include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).” The Institute notes, “what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the “mainstream” media, and liberal politicians say about global warming.”
The Heartland Institute is clearly attempting to sway people into thinking that those who accept that global warming is happening are marginal kooks: “The point is that believing in global warming is not “mainstream,” smart, or sophisticated. … The people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society. This is why the most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.”
Despite the Heartland Institute’s efforts, the majority of the American public accepts that global warming is occurring. A recent poll by the Brookings Institution notes that 62% of Americans agree that “there is solid evidence that that average temperature on Earth has been getting warmer.” Interestingly 80% of Democrats surveyed believe that global warming is happening, compared to 47% of Republicans. Similarly, a March 2012 study by the Center for Climate Change Communication said “70 percent of Americans say that corporations and industry should be doing more to address global warming, which is back up to levels last seen in the fall of 2008.” The study also notes, “More than two-thirds of Americans (68%) say the U.S. should make either a large-scale or medium-scale effort to reduce global warming, even if this has large or moderate economic costs.”
As long as some rich power brokers fear that action to mitigate climate change will eat into their profits, comforts and beliefs, we can expect more desperate measures like this sleazy billboard campaign.
I don’t know if it works because the billboard doesn’t mention alarmism or CAGW, but it’s true. bin Laden, Manson and – worst of all – Al Gore, Jim Hansen and Michael M. do believe in the alarmism. Pointing that out would tend to alarm an alarmist, causing him to sound the alarm. I, alarmingly speaking, am alarmingly unalarmed.
So should we call you the Unalarmer?
I think the numbers quoted in that pole are self-serving bullshit. Consider the source.
Believing the earth has warmed is NOT the same as believing in catastrophic warming caused by CO2.
Well, for them, it is. If they don’t make that link, then there’s no link to mankind. After all, we’re responsible for CO2 (supposedly), ergo sum stupido we are responsible for warming. If you tell them the truth, or, I mean, CLAIM that those aren’t the same thing, then, their argument looks pretty stupid, so, there’s your evidence you must be wrong. Right?
As most informed skeptics of AGW would agree the earth has warmed I am not sure what the Brookings Institute point is. Conflating a warming climate (fact) with the unproven theory that it is caused by man is a common tactic for the political purveyors of AGW.
While it may be technically accurate. I believe that, the Heartland significantly damaged themselves with this. It is a tactic clear from the alarmist’s handbook, sheer guilt by association. Baseless, tactless, and certain to backfire. Heartland’s greatest ally has been objective truth, and they shed it for shock value.
Heartland’s statement on this issue
http://climateconference.heartland.org/our-billboards/
This is a rhetorical device called Argumentum ad Hominem. This form is called ‘Guilt by association.” Like almost all rhetorical devices, it is a fallacious argument, but fallacious arguments are also effective. They have persisted for thousands of years because they *work*, and we have all had them used against us. To acknowledge them is to go on the defensive, which usually blunts one’s attack.
This appears to be an application of a strategem of Sun Tzu: when attacked you should respond with a counter-attack that puts your attacker on the defensive. This should provide you with the opening to unleash your own strategically planned attack against the enemy’s weaknesses.
Finding “the opening to unleash your own strategically planned attack against the enemy’s weaknesses” sounds good, but it’s been tried. Over and over again. It doesn’t work. When they commit wire fraud and libel, that constitutes an opening against *us*, no less. Facts, such as that the Koch donation was for health care research, do not deter them. One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
It’s easy to take the high moral ground by brandishing white flags. It’s a feel-good opportunity, but it doesn’t get you much in the end.
I believe it would be wise for Heartland to pull that ad without delay or comment.