The Scientific Reality of Climate Change: Why the DNC Refuses to Debate

Why is the Democratic National Committee (DNC) refusing to hold a climate debate? The answer is simple: the debate can only be about how to address the reality of climate change, not whether it is real at all. Intelligent politicians leave scientific debates to scientists, focusing instead on formulating effective policies based on expert insights. Ignoring this reality is not just unproductive; it is a gross act of criminal negligence.

Debating Science is a Wasted Effort

Only those lacking intelligence and qualification tackle scientific topics. Politicians, with their policy-making expertise, should focus on implementing strategies informed by scientific facts, rather than engaging in fruitless debates over the basic reality of climate change. Debating whether climate change is real or not distracts from the pressing task of devising practical solutions. Countries, including the United States, are already facing severe consequences from climate phenomena. Just consider the extreme weather events and rising sea levels that are becoming more frequent and severe.

A Call for Responsible Leadership

Politicians should debate the most effective policies to address climate change, rather than questioning its existence. Ignoring the accumulated scientific evidence and factual warnings from experts can exacerbate the situation and cost lives. For instance, pandemics and rising temperatures are no longer hypotheticals but real, tangible threats. Debating the authenticity of these phenomena, such as using absurd arguments like 'drinking bleach' or 'snow melting,' not only deflects responsibility but also prolongs suffering.

Exposing the Deceptive Nature of Unqualified Climate Debaters

Creationists, climate change deniers, anti-vaxxers, and flat-Earthers operate under false premises, claiming that whoever scores the most points in a debate wins, regardless of the veracity of their claims. These debates are not about factual accuracy but about winning arguments. Thomas Hockman’s approach, for example, illustrates the futility of engaging with such individuals. Attempting to prove a point to someone who refuses to accept basic scientific facts is akin to playing chess with a pigeon—ineffective at best and detrimental at worst.

Personal Experiences and Observations

As a former Democrat who has consistently followed climate news since 1988, the reality of climate change has only become more evident. I witnessed firsthand how my hometown, Phoenix, faced unprecedented heatwaves, and how CO2 levels were heating up the planet's atmosphere and oceans. Reports from Congressional hearings in the 1990s highlighted the increasing frequency of extreme weather events, such as the 1000-year floods and heatwaves.

Fast forward to 2023, Earth experienced another of the hottest years on record, particularly in July. Phoenix endured over five weeks of temperatures exceeding 43°C (110°F), and the world faced multiple 1000-year floods every month. These events are not confined to America, as evidenced by the early 2024 global heatwave, which claimed over 40,000 lives, including 1,500 during the Hajj pilgrimage.

The extra heat also contributes to increased ocean evaporation, leading to more frequent and severe tropical cyclones. For instance, the catastrophic CAT 5 Hurricane Michael in Mexico Beach, Florida, devastated the region, leaving many homeless and in need of emergency relief. Furthermore, FEMA is struggling to keep up with the frequency and intensity of these events, exhausting its emergency relief funds before the hurricane season even begins.

Conclusion

Debating the reality of climate change is a waste of time and effort. Intelligent leaders should focus on developing and implementing effective policies to mitigate the impacts of climate change. A nuanced, evidence-based approach is not just crucial; it is necessary for the survival and prosperity of our global community. Ignoring the overwhelming scientific evidence and the accumulated experiences of those closely observing these changes can only lead to more dire consequences.