Two photos are being passed around the Internet this week, held up as evidence that climate change is real.
The first is a striking photo of an emaciated, starving polar bear taken by Icelandic photographer Kerstin Langenberger near Svalbard, an archipelago of Norway.
“We have to make all the effort we can to prevent temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees,” Ms. Langenberger stated when contacted by the Inquisitr. As a person living in a northern country, Langenberger has seen, first hand, the effects of climate change on both the environment and wildlife.
The second is a tweet by New Scientist, which was retweeted by Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla Motors Inc. (NASDAQ: TSLA) and SpaceX, showing the Sierra Nevada snowpack at a 500-year low.
Is climate change a fantasy made up by the left, an agenda to be exploited by so-called green companies who care more about lining their own pockets than the future of humankind or the truth?
It is difficult to know what to believe. A good starting point would be to consider who is talking about climate change when evaluating viewpoints. Listen to what Neil deGrasse Tyson has to say about climate change.
Mr. deGrasse Tyson is quite clear that he believes people who are connected to the oil industry have an agenda, that they “cherry pick” data, and that he believes that climate change is real. Mr. deGrasse Tyson also thoroughly explains the motivations of pure scientists and why evaluating the motivations of different speakers is important.
National Geographic, a publication that has prided itself as being a pure science magazine for almost 130 years, was recently acquired by Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox for $725 million, according to reports from the National Post. This has some scientists worried. The National Post quoted a Union of Concerned Scientists’ study stating that 72 percent of climate change coverage by Fox was “misleading.”
The Event Chronicle has reported on Rupert Murdoch’s oil interests, perhaps helping to bring his views on climate change under scrutiny. Stating that Murdoch as a vested interest in denying climate change would seem reasonable.
In last 3 decades carbon in US air has reduced by nearly 50%.— Rupert Murdoch (@rupertmurdoch) August 27, 2015
A climate change skeptic not a denier. Sept UN meets in NY with endless alarmist nonsense from u know whom! Pessimists always seen as sages— Rupert Murdoch (@rupertmurdoch) August 27, 2015
Next consider “visionary” Elon Musk and his green companies: Tesla and SolarCity Corporation (NASDAQ: SCTY). Musk regularly speaks with regard to climate change.
Analysis of Musk’s views, however, must be tempered with the fact that he literally has billions of shareholders money invested in green initiatives. As much as Rupert Murdoch could reasonably be seen as a climate change denier, Musk could reasonably be seen as climate change hype man.
If Musk ran private companies, investing only his own money, whether or not he was successful would be his own business. However, as the CEO of one, and a major stockholder of another, publicly traded green companies, Tesla and SolarCity, the profitability of each is of utmost importance.
Almost no one, except perhaps Rupert Murdoch and the like, could have a problem with Tesla and SolarCity if they were profitable. Neither company is profitable at the moment, and each has suffered major Wall Street earnings expectation reductions over the past 60 days. No matter how low observers place their Tesla and SolarCity targets, Musk and company can’t seem to live up to them.
The Inquisitr has previously written with regard to Musk’s possible motivations.
“The GigaFab, SpaceX, and colonizing Mars: each is a visionary and even humanitarian cause. However, to investors in TSLA and SCTY shares, staring at blood-red earnings summaries, the vision could easily be seen, more and more as time passes, as the moves of a master hype and con man, and The Late Show With Stephen Colbert “nuke mars” interview as icing on the cake.”
Evidence that climate change is real is all around us and, as deGrasse Tyson notes, evaluating the motivations of individual speakers is perhaps the most telling aspect of the climate change debate.
While the (still unfulfilled) promise of an affordable electric car holds the potential to positively impact climate change. Wouldn’t moving closer to work, riding a bike and reducing consumption (an unholy sin in capitalist society) across all areas do more?
[Photo Copyright Kerstin Langenberger — Used With Permission]