[DesuMaiden]

I found this interesting article on the subject...

http://energyskeptic.com/2012/climate-change-deniers/

Basically in summary, it is just not politically correct to acknowledge peak oil and climate change. It doesn't win elections, so politicians don't address it. Our political system is based on infinite growth in consumption and population, so the issues of resource depletion, population overshoot, and climate change cannot be addressed in a system where infinite growth is the mentality. It will be very difficult to convince the public that these issues are real and act accordingly.

[Shaved Monkey]

The world is a mad place held together with lies they just represent their constituents.
No one would elect someone who said we are all doomed and we need to crash this gravy train before it goes over the cliff.

[Dybbuk]

It's really easy to figure out why political "leaders" act the way they do. It's to win elections. Either their own, or others in their party.

Both peak oil and climate change are "pessimistic" viewpoints. Being pessimistic usually doesn't win, because voters have this unconscious belief that they can make bad stuff go away by voting for someone who says that the bad stuff isn't real. And even if the voter *does* believe in the bad stuff, he suspects that he'll get stuck with the bill for fixing it, while others will get off scot free, so the safe route is to vote for the guy who says that we're not going to fix it at all.

[DesuMaiden]

The world is a mad place held together with lies they just represent their constituents.
No one would elect someone who said we are all doomed and we need to crash this gravy train before it goes over the cliff.

That's exactly the reason. Either way, peak oil, climate change, population overshoot and environmental destruction are real issues, even though they are never addressed.

[DesuMaiden]

It's really easy to figure out why political "leaders" act the way they do. It's to win elections. Either their own, or others in their party.

Both peak oil and climate change are "pessimistic" viewpoints. Being pessimistic usually doesn't win, because voters have this unconscious belief that they can make bad stuff go away by voting for someone who says that the bad stuff isn't real. And even if the voter *does* believe in the bad stuff, he suspects that he'll get stuck with the bill for fixing it, while others will get off scot free, so the safe route is to vote for the guy who says that we're not going to fix it at all.

I don't care about pessimism. It is reality. We can't continue what we are doing. And this quote is exactly why peak oil and other environmental issues cannot be solved.

There’s no solution to peak oil, except to consume less in all areas of life, limit immigration, and above all, encourage women to have zero or one child, which is not acceptable to political leaders or corporations, who depend on growth for their survival.

It looks like the only "solution" now is overshoot and die-off. Sad that it has to come down to this. It didn't have to be like this, but we foolishly chose the bad option. We only think in the short-term, and we never think of the long-term consequences of our actions will be. Human beings are really not as intelligent as they think.

[Peak_Yeast]

The problem is that organized crime is on top of power everywhere in the world. Even if there is a few places where this is not the case they are not representative.

When the people that runs "the world" are just there for personal greed - or even greed for their "family" you cannot expect them to think about anything else. - This type of people are brain damaged in the real sense of the word. Psycho&Sociopaths has real and permanent damage to their brains - that prevents them from learning from mistakes or even punishment - at the same time they lack any real understanding of empathy. They are to be compared to the worst dope-adicts - their addiction might be power, money, prestige and not only actual drugs - even though they are probably often there too.

Once these types takes over power they are impossible to remove in any peaceful way - and sinced the governments has dumbed down the public - besides having a real comprehensive preventive system as well as any weapon desireable there is only collapse left to solve the situation.

Revolution is soo yesterday - unfortunately.

[DesuMaiden]

The problem is that organized crime is on top of power everywhere in the world. Even if there is a few places where this is not the case they are not representative.

When the people that runs "the world" are just there for personal greed - or even greed for their "family" you cannot expect them to think about anything else. - This type of people are brain damaged in the real sense of the word. Psycho&Sociopaths has real and permanent damage to their brains - that prevents them from learning from mistakes or even punishment - at the same time they lack any real understanding of empathy. They are to be compared to the worst dope-adicts - their addiction might be power, money, prestige and not only actual drugs - even though they are probably often there too.

Once these types takes over power they are impossible to remove in any peaceful way - and sinced the governments has dumbed down the public - besides having a real comprehensive preventive system as well as any weapon desireable there is only collapse left to solve the situation.

Revolution is soo yesterday - unfortunately.

You are right. Collapse of the current paradigm is the only solution. We need the infinite growth paradigm to die.

[KaiserJeep]

Assorted nonsense from all posters, and none of it on point for this thread.

Our political leaders do not discuss climate change or PO because it is a lose/lose discussion. Either you get serious about Climate Change and ruin your entire economy in partial remediation, while watching dozens of other countries wallowing in rapidly disappearing fossil fuels, or you ignore the issue and the exact same Climate Change arrives a month earlier and ruins your economy for you. Either you ruin your economy by switching to much more expensive renewable energy, or the FF's run out and ruin your economy for you. Best avoid the whole discussion, as it might impede you getting into political office.

Remember that there are no Climate Change models that show we can save ourselves. The most we can do is slow the warming by an insignificant amount. There are no plans that say we can feed and house and care for 7.3 billion humans with feeble renewable energy sources. We who remain on this planet are doomed.

[Lore]

You have a point. It's called kick the can down the road and hope you're not around by then to catch the hot potato.

I pity the poor suckers left in charge with no solution other than to suggest to their constituency to grab ankles firmly with both hands, put head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.

[kuidaskassikaeb]

I think our leaders do discuss climate change. We have reached the point where they are forced to produce fake progress. There was a meeting in Copenhagen, in Brazil etc. We have the IPCC. We have Kyoto. We have a deal between the US and China. Now would be a good time to make it real, but they clearly do talk about climate change. That much progress has been made.

[dinopello]

The US senate has officially recognized that the climate does, in fact, change. Just not that we have anything to do with it.

In a series of votes that took place on Thursday and Friday, the U.S. Senate voted against four separate measures that would have put it on record as recognizing what the vast majority of climate scientists have shown for decades now: that global warming since the start of the industrial revolution is largely manmade.

On Thursday evening, the Senate voted to table, or set aside, an amendment offered by Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, which would have expressed the "sense of the Senate" — a non-binding resolution that expresses the Senate's views on a matter — that climate change is real, is caused mainly by human activities and is already harming the U.S. and other countries. In introducing the amendment, Sanders said that if the Senate denies the reality of manmade climate change, "it would not only lead to bad public policy, but it would be an embarrassment before the entire world.”

Another amendment, offered by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, which would also have endorsed the reality of the manmade contribution to global warming but used different language to do so, was also defeated.

An amendment sponsored by Republican Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota that expressed the "sense of Congress" that "climate change is real, and human activity contributes to climate change" was defeated.

The Senate also rejected an amendment offered by Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii that would have put the legislative body on record as saying that "climate change is real, and human activity significantly contributes to climate change." The word "significantly" was cited by Senate Energy Committee chairperson, Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, as a reason for her "no" vote.

but here it is, it's official...

The only climate change-related amendment that the Senate managed to pass — by a lopsided vote of 98 to 1 — merely says that the planet's climate does, in fact, change, and that this fact is "not a hoax." However, manmade climate change is a hoax, according to a prominent cosponsor of this amendment, Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma. Inhofe heads the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, putting him in a key role in providing oversight of the EPA.

[dashster]

I think international leaders acknowledge global warming, they just choose to do nothing about it because the solution is so painful. But Peak Oil, Peak Gas and Peak Coal, while presenting a horrifying problem, will solve the global warming issue.

[Lore]

I think international leaders acknowledge global warming, they just choose to do nothing about it because the solution is so painful. But Peak Oil, Peak Gas and Peak Coal, while presenting a horrifying problem, will solve the global warming issue.

We argued this nearly 10 years ago. Conclusion, there is enough left in the system to push climate change beyond the limits of most life on the planet.

[Shaved Monkey]

I think international leaders acknowledge global warming, they just choose to do nothing about it because the solution is so painful. But Peak Oil, Peak Gas and Peak Coal, while presenting a horrifying problem, will solve the global warming issue.

In Australia the conservative global warming deniers are in power their claim to fame is removing a Carbon Tax
"Coal is good for humanity" according to the Australian PM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-13/c ... ys/5810244

[dinopello]

Inhofe finally comes up with some proof !

[Tanada]

Politics are like a set of several nested spider webs layered together, every decision a node of pressure pulling in many directions. Once a decision is reached the pressure shifts to the next node in that direction, but unless you are actually in the web itself it is hard to know what pressure will have which direction of influence.

[Pops]

Why do our political leaders deny peak oil & climate change?

Because they represent the people who elect them.

[dinopello]

This is a pretty nice retort to Senator Snowball*

*Yesterday, the Republican Chair of the Environmental Commiteee (Sen. Inhofe) brought in a snowball from outside and offered it into evidence that climate change was a bunch of hooey.

[ennui2]

I'm not convinced that politicians who deny or downplay these issues secretly think they are as severe as we do. They may genuinely not think it's that big of a deal or think "someone will think of something", which is, let's face it, how most regular people think. Why would they be any smarter? It is naive to think that just because they are TPTB that they have a full grasp of the situation. They are just as susceptible to psychological denial or lack of understanding of the science as anyone else.

Also, these issues do come up in Washington. Obama has made climate change a low-rung agenda item of his presidency. It's there. It's just not prioritized where it should be. But it would be political suicide to try to get the company onto the war-footing stance it should be. The voting public won't stand for it. So we only have ourselves to blame for how government handles the situation. We can't look to them as our mommies and daddies who will coax us into doing what we need to do. They will do what they think will make us happy in the next election cycle, which is, as the other poster said, kick the can down the road.