Emotion, Not Facts, Guiding Environment Debates

No matter which side of the environmental awareness and climate change debates you might be on the side of, one thing is pretty much guaranteed: You are very likely more driven by emotion than facts. Even when we hear things like the fact that there’re way more trees on earth than were once expected, both sides immediately make their own assumptions about what that means and leave no room for discourse. I do think everyone agrees that nature and the environment are important, we just really need to come to an agreement on how we can go about protecting it.

 

Witness the inability of the Senate and House to function constructively because neither political party can admit any course but theirs has credibility, all compounded by an apparent belief/assumption that they can’t be wrong. Any cooperation has been stifled by a — relatively small — faction which thrives on shouting louder, hinting of “conspiracies”, predicting economic disasters and denying any human caused environmental problems exist. Their negativity has halted passage of much potentially beneficial environmental legislation, most progressive social legislation, and jeopardized the future of our children in a rapidly (driven by climate change) deteriorating natural environment.

It is past time for any of us to base any critical decisions — such as whether to make the effort to vote — on the assumption that supportive facts, necessity and (perceived) positive public opinion automatically guarantee our desired outcome. Continue Reading at Gazette-Times