What is the human-caused climate change denier position

[james_davis_nicoll]

On the Dust Bowl.

Comments

[james-angove.livejournal.com]

Mostly not to be a pedantic dick (OK. That is a lie. However, there is a small nugget of desire for increased knowledge buried within the seething, hateful mass that is my desire to be my pedantic dick), I thought that the dust bowl really wasn't a climate change phenomena. My understanding was that the dust bowl was a combination principally of drought plus ill considered farming techniques. Excluding folks who box themselves into deeply stupid arguments and don't know how to back down, it isn't my sense that climate change deniers deny that human beings can affect the land. Although that may have changed...

Granting that this is 15+ years gone, but certainly most anyone in the small farming town I grew up in who had an opinion on the subject a) didn't really believe in global warming but also b) thought the dust bowl was an epic example of human stupidity. These were mostly the middle aged farmers, guys I met when I was tagging along with my Dad (who acted as field man for his processing company).

On reflection though, it was another time. While they were reflexively both socially conservative as well as deeply suspicious of environmentalists[1]. But they were also mostly college educated at least to some extent and on really good terms with the OSU Ag extension office. It was their much better provided children who were already drifting into a Limbaugh influenced proto-Tea Party world view.

Huh. So really, this whole comment is much about nothing, but I'm pleased to have thought about it.

[1]For reasons both fair and specious, the then extant Oregon environmental movement had a habit of really pissing off farmers. UofO really went in for a quantity over quality strategy in hippy production, in those days.