The climate crisis scam has mostly been ignored at presidential debates since 2000, because there were things rather more important during the years since than to focus on a low hanging fruit, manufactured issue that people care about in theory but not practice. It’s even been mostly ignored at primary’s debates for Democrats. You’d think they would be happy that it at least got a question, right? Nope
What does the first climate question at a US debate in 20 years reveal?
The long-awaited climate question in last night’s presidential debate broke a 20-year silent streak from moderators on the crisis – thrusting it into prime time but also revealing just how stuck in the past much of the US is on the issue.
After more than an hour of chaos as the candidates talked over each other, the Fox News anchor Chris Wallace asked Donald Trump: “What do you believe about the science of climate change and what will you do in the next four years to confront it?â€
Former vice-president Al Gore – who was the last candidate asked directly about climate change in a general election debate, in 2000 – praised Wallace in a tweet for “asking serious and well-researched questions about the climate crisisâ€. In 2008, the vice-presidential candidates were asked to debate what is true and false about the climate crisis and the presidential candidates were asked about reducing US dependence on foreign oil.
The exchange was the most substantive discussion yet of the climate crisis in a general election presidential debate, said Bracken Hendricks, co-founder of the climate group Evergreen Action. But, that is not necessarily saying much, given the previously low bar.
“However, Chris Wallace also fell into several common traps of asking whether climate change is real and discussing the cost of action without the crucial context of the cost of inaction,†Hendricks said. “The moderators of future debates should build on this foundation and investigate the candidates’ divergent plans on the climate crisis.â€
See, the debate is over. It’s over so much that ….. most in a position to create the laws, rules, and regulations refuse to give up their own over-sized use of fossil fuels and make their own lives carbon neutral.
The debate could have focused on the starkly contrasted futures Americans must choose between – tackling the crisis that global leaders call the biggest ever threat to human rights, or fueling it.
Instead, Wallace framed the existence of a human-made climate crisis as something that is for some Americans still debatable, asking Trump “What do you believe about the science of climate change†and “[Do] you believe that human pollution, gas, greenhouse gas emissions, contributes to the global warming of this planetâ€.
Science unequivocally shows humans are the predominant cause of global warming.
Weird how they never actually link to that Belief, eh? If that is what they belief, why no lifestyle changes for those who believe that? Also, these people are never happy.
