Representative Chris Herrod requests scientists please stop trying to confuse him with the facts

   In an opinion piece published in the Salt Lake Tribune, Provo Republican Representative Chris Herrod makes abundantly clear: 1) no amount of scientific evidence is going to convince him global warming is real; 2) he really isn't all that familiar with the earth's geologic or climate history anyway; and, 3) he gets all his scientific and economic misinformation from Republican talking point memos. 

When describing his concerns about the science surrounding climate change, Representative Herrod opens with the argument "Since the Earth is coming out of an ice age and been significantly warming throughout its history, most agree this is true."  What Rep. Herrod believes most agree is true isn't exactly clear, but one thing scientists do not agree with is the notion the world has been "significantly warming throughout its history." 

In fact, the Earth has gone through periods when it was  warm and periods when it was cold.  It has not, as Herrod claims, gotten significantly warmer but rather has seen climate fluctuations throughout its history.  While Herrod and other deniers often point to past natural climate fluctuations as evidence we are going through something similar now, the science simply isn't on their side.

One recent study indicates peak carbon dioxide levels over the past 2.1 million years averaged 280 parts per million (ppm).  In other words, throughout all the intermittent ice ages and warming spells which occurred over the more than 2 million years of our planet's most recent history, the average level of a key greenhouse gas was 105 ppm lower than it is today.  Virtually all of that increase has occurred in the past 150 years.  One of the study's authors states "Previous studies indicated that CO₂ did not change much over the past 20 million years..." though he admits the further back in time we go the greater uncertainty we encounter and more research is needed.

But Representative Herrod and others think it wise to throw caution to the wind and use any example of a gap in our understanding of the problem as an excuse to do nothing.  Why not keep pumping greenhouse gas into the atmosphere and see what happens when we go way beyond anything experienced in at least the past 2.1 million years, if not much longer?

Representative Herrod also wants proof we can do anything about climate change even if it is real.  How exactly would we know anything we do helps mitigate or reverse climate change unless we try?  How can we prove expanding our use of solar, wind, and geothermal technology and reducing our reliance on fossil fuels will do any good unless we expand our use of solar, wind and geothermal technology and reduce our reliance on fossil fuels? 

Herrod and others claim increasing our reliance on clean energy will undermine our ability to compete with China and Europe, both of whom are now rapidly expanding their development of clean energy technologies.  Not so sunny Germany has become a world leader in solar technology, Spain has become a world leader in wind power, and China has begun vastly increasing its investment into clean energy production.  Contrary to the denier/do nothing camp's argument, the risks to both the environment and our economy if we just sit on our hands while the rest of the world moves forward are significant.

Unfortunately, the truth is Rep. Herrod and others don't believe in science. As he and others repeatedly demonstrate, no number of climatologists issuing warnings or BYU scientists signing letters will cure them of their anti-science world view.  When a legislator or anyone issues a plea for someone to "Please convince me with the science" in response to a letter from local scientists citing "a database search on our university [BYU] library system" uncovering "more than 600 peer-reviewed, scientific articles" addressing just one climate related issue raised by some legislators, we really shouldn't hold out any hope that person will ever be convinced.

The only solution here is for voters to begin demanding their representatives have a healthy respect for science.  There is nothing at all wrong with skepticism and asking scientists tough questions.  The scientific method demands nothing less.  But pretending little to no science has been done when literally thousands of studies are available and more than 97% of scientists are in agreement is, to put it simply, an example of willful ignorance that would make a flat Earth advocate proud.