Yale’s Program on Climate Change Communication demonstrates that Americans fall into one of six categories regarding climate science conclusions: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful and Dismissive. Fortunately, over 70 percent of us accept science, understand that global warming is happening and agree that humans are responsible.
Meanwhile, the Dismissive category represents less than 10 percent of us. Like the president, they simply reject the science and disregard the obvious evidence, visible to all, that tells us something untoward is happening. No amount of data can persuade Dismissive Americans that we have a problem or that we should reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases.
Among them are an array of Ashland’s malcontented contrarians who accept and promote any absurd conspiracy hoax that passes by just so long as it conforms to their anti-social, anti-government pre-conceptions. They include racists, anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers, Nazi sympathizers, xenophobes, flat-earthers, and birthers.
Fortunately, they represent a very small proportion of the voting population. This means their stupidity can be ignored and their demonstrable ignorance can be nullified by sane voters at the ballot box.
Regrettably, the Dismissives include Oregonians who oppose our state enacting meaningful greenhouse gas emissions reduction policies. We should ignore them and demand meaningful action.
Headline was negative
While I appreciated your report on the DSL public hearing on the Jordan Cove permit approval, I was really shocked at the huge thick headline labeling the more than a thousand of us who attended the hearing as “protesters.”
We were and are concerned citizens, performing our lawful civic duty by attending a public hearing designated by law to give citizens an opportunity for their concerns to be heard before a permit application is completed. This is part of the democratic process, and we who made the effort to attend that hearing should be praised and honored for being good citizens.
The word protester, for some folks, has a negative, even inflammatory implication. In these dark times of careless, unbridled name-calling and political mud-slinging, we need to be careful in the language we use. The sub-heading — in much smaller print — was true: “More than a thousand attend to express their concerns of environmental impact.”
That should have been the only headline — in large, bold print.