Liberal senator says climate change is a hoax
The Guardian reports that Senator Ian MacDonald thinks it fanciful that humans are contributing to climate change. You know, I can’t think of another field where a person who willfully holds a belief in the face of all the evidence to the contrary is able to hold on to their job – well perhaps other than the pope.
This new theory, I refer to it often as a fad or a farce or a hoax, that suddenly since man started the industrial age, a change of climate has happened is just farcical and fanciful.
The Senator is saying that all of the science, all of the research, all of the evidence is wrong. Why? Because he says so. And MacDonald doesn’t only not believe in climate change he doesn’t want any more pesky evidence that runs counter to his view being produced: In 2013 he said too many research grants were being allocated towards climate research.
Now if it was just him sitting in the corner of the pub, slurring his words and shouting at the TV screen that wouldn’t really matter. It matters because he is a senator with both power and a platform. This is a man who is making significant decisions about all of our futures. It matters.
And I don’t mean it matters solely in relation to climate change. It matters when someone can willfully ignore all the evidence. Will he also ignore what economists say about the GST? Is the idea that our oil reserves are running down also fanciful? Such a willingness to ignore reality is evidence of deeply flawed thinking and you would have hoped that a prerequisite for a job like a senator might the capacity to digest and grasp the evidence presented to you.
But of course that’s not the case. We don’t elect based on competency or experience; we elect based on party politics and popularity. Maybe we get what we deserve, but we’re certainly not getting what we need.
2 thoughts on “Liberal senator says climate change is a hoax”
If you took profit out of the equation, you would probably get more consistent agreement on this topic. Also, climate change requires a long term, strategic solution but that doesn’t fit into the “week to week” whim of the Australian electorate. Self interested politicians on one side and disinterested voters on the other. The prospects don’t look good. Am I being grim?
True. But whatever prospects there are must be based on reacting to the evidence, not a politician’s personal mythology.