Denying reality

A commenter to an earlier post wrote, “climate change is a politically motivated idea put out there by the Democrat party in order to gain more control and power over us.”

I would like to suggest that this kind of “thinking” is not thinking at all but rather, a blind denial of reality.

This is exactly what got us into the mess we are in in the first place, a steadfast unwillingness to consider the long-term consequences of our actions. We are not dealing with beliefs here. We are dealing with facts.

Face it. We are thrashing our environment to the point where we are causing serious and possibly irreparable damage. Hide your head in the sand if you will. That’s your choice. The great beauty of beliefs is that they carry no burden of proof. You can simply believe them in spite of the fact that all evidence is against you.

I have taken the position that, we, as woodworkers, can do our part to ameliorate these issues by being conscious of how we use materials, which materials we choose and in how we dispose of waste. We cannot fix the problem but we can contribute to the solution. Or we can simply deny that a problem exists in the first place and go on doing business as usual.



  • Scott says:


    With that comment I think that you alienated well over 50% of the readers. I agree that as woodworkers we should all be conscious of what we use in terms of resources. But saying that someone who does not believe that global warming is man made is not intelligent is not an intelligent comment on your part.

    There have been numerous studies showing that data has been fabricated to prove global warming is man made. Read about the UK university that had research misconduct. Much like the typical liberal, you would rather attack than discuss.

    You should stick to woodworking rather than biased political commentary.

  • George Rey says:

    I would refer you to these two news items before you close the door based on what is becoming more dogma than fact on global warming now changed to climate change:

    NOAA Reinstates July 1936 As The Hottest Month On Record
    Wasn’t someone being mocked just the other day for posting that July 1936 was the hottest month on record? Seem like NOAA was fudging the data just a tad. This is how disinformation works. Post something that is just a little bit of a lie. Or tell two truths and then a lie. After the lie is believed quietly go back and change the lie into truth. Those who don’t go back and look will run with the lie forever. Fortunately for us this is the age of the Internet.

    According to NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in 2012, the “average temperature for the contiguous U.S. during July was 77.6°F, 3.3°F above the 20th century average, marking the warmest July and all-time warmest month on record for the nation in a period of record that dates back to 1895.”

    “The previous warmest July for the nation was July 1936, when the average U.S. temperature was 77.4°F,” NOAA said in 2012.

    This statement by NOAA was still available on their website when checked by The Daily Caller News Foundation. But when meteorologist and climate blogger Anthony Watts went to check the NOAA data on Sunday he found that the science agency had quietly reinstated July 1936 as the hottest month on record in the U.S.

    The scandal of fiddled global warming data
    by Jeff Davis on June 23, 2014 in Corruption, Failed predictions, Global Cooling

    When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
    Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed “Data tampering at USHCN/GISS”, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on “fabricated” data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.

  • Gregg Miller says:

    Bravo, David. And you are spot on!

    I have had the great past experience of being an Assistant Scout Master for 16 years with a Boy Scout troop in North Carolina, several years back. Part of that experience was acting as an adult advisor on two council trips to Philmont Scout Ranch in New Mexico. The learning of “no trace” camping is instilled in all who make these treks, along with “take only photographs, and leave only footprints”. On all of the outings we made with our boys, we ALWAYS tried to leave a site in better shape than we found it. That also meant picking up other peoples’ trash.

    Too bad many in our society don’t give a flip what they leave behind, or what they do to the environment. Our Native American brothers have it right as well. We’re don’t own this earth, we’re merely stewards of this earth while on temporary assignment here during our lives.

  • Glen says:

    You are talking two different things. Evviorment os mot thee same as climate change. I think we all agree that envirment should be protected but to say tht we are causing climate change is a stretch beyond belief. There is not direct proof that man is causing the change and has far less inpact then solor bursts, iruptions, and any number of natural events. If we are in gobal warming then each year shoould show an increase that just isn’t the case.

  • mike irwin says:

    if you think about it wood is mostly carbon so if we cut down a tree a new on will grow and if we build a fine piece of furniture with it you have stored carbon for grnerations

  • Andy says:


    Come on now, you are smarter than to quote a commenter who therefore is obviously a reader. That aside a few comments I will suggest.

    Climate change needs to be talked about with facts, no hear say and for sure not what is heard from Al Gore. He and his cronies have done nothing but profit off of ‘climate change’. Some FACTS:

    1. The world has been slowly increasing and slowly decreasing temperature gradually over millennia long before we were contributing anything.
    2. The highest carbon dioxide producer on the planet…. wait for it… HUMANS!!!
    3. The polar ice caps have receded NOT melted, average temperatures have gone up, but it isn’t an oven. The reports were partially correct at best and therefore lose credibility to an average engineer or critical thinker. If one was 10-20% right in school, wouldn’t one get an F?
    4. The main goal of a professor is to publish papers. This sounds harsh but I have first hand experience with a professor who did not receive ten year after being awarded multiple awards for teaching. The University system is based on publishing papers and bringing in money and he was let go for only publishing a few papers and not more. This needs to be taken into perspective when reading many research papers and why they were done. The professor who wrote the conclusions may not even agree with them (have seen this too), but they get the paper published and bring in more dollars for the University.

    I really enjoy your viewpoint because it is different than mine; but I very much base arguments on facts. This is something I wish many more did, the majority of people for sure base conversations off of manipulated news and hearsay; this is sad to me. Please refrain from quoting and borderline going after a reader, if you continue you will lose me as a reader. I have great respect for you and what you have accomplished but it wasn’t being on the ‘up and up’.

    Having said all of this, and no matter how much I feel Al Gore and all of the others are full of S*&T, I agree with everyone helping out where possible. This is just being good to other humans and the environment in general. No one needs to create extra trash, waste extra energy, or intentionally hurt the community. Even though I am a business manager and very much wish for smaller government and not the socialistic approach we are taking recently, I do agree with being ‘green’ and taking care of one another and the planet; just base it on facts.

    P.S. I would love for you to come up with some facts and challenge me by the way. That is what discussion is all about!!

  • Well put David, thank you for posting!

  • Kevin McHugh says:

    You’re right about woodworkers needing to be conscious of using and disposing of materials but your dismissal of the comment used at the beginning of the blog reveals your liberal news mentality. You have lost a lot of respect from me by slamming a point of view that that you deem a “blind denial of reality”. The facts that you have believed as truth are manipulated and repeated in the main stream media just as incorrectly as the need for Obamacare.


  • Bill Gideon says:

    Climate change is happening now. Climate change has been happening since day 1. The real issue is to what extent our actions are contributing to it. If we could put an end to all greenhouse gasses caused by man, I wonder who/what we would blame when climate change continues it’s inevitable march?

  • THIBEAULT says:

    DD has a rational thought to counter an irrational one. The overwhelming evidence of global warming is denied only by the willfully ignorant and their grandchildren will know them for the shortsighted fools that they are.

  • Rich says:

    I would like to disagree with you on this climate change/ environmental destruction/ global warming issue. If we are to deal with facts it seems to me that the constant change in terms about this issue is proof enough that it is false. First it was Global Warming, when that was proven not to be happening and instead the globe is cooling, it became Climate Change, once people saw through that term these environmentalist starting using the term Environmental Destruction. If that is not enough do you really believe these global warming propagandists can tell use the weather will warm 4 degrees globally in 100 years when the weather forecasts are wrong 3 days out? How about the ship carrying these very same global warming perpetrators to the South Pole getting stuck in ICE they did not even know was that far from the pole. How about the many Ice breakers sent to help getting stuck? Still they have the nerve to tell us the ice is shrinking. I think the evidence is clear!
    On top of that, these false claims, yes false claims have driven prices up on our woodworking materials such as sheet goods. The restrictions on logging have also driven up lumber prices. Worst yet has been destruction of wood finishes. These problems imposed by the environmentalist and there accomplices on the left has hurt our industry. It is already hard enough to find enough people to buy our products we do not need to make it any harder. I expect this type of talk from the Sierra Club not a magazine dedicated to furthering wood working.

  • Daniel Jones says:

    The data around man caused global warming or “climate change” has been shown to be incorrect or outright falsified in case after case. When the proponents stop trying to choke off debate with claims of “settled science” I will be willing to listen. Until then I wish they would be quiet. Their unproven claims are just confusing the discussion. “Settled Science” is a term that flies in the face of working scientists. Nothing is ever settled. Everything should be open for study. Look at the data. Who knows we might learn something. Tell Chicken Little that the sky really isn’t falling.

  • Lea says:

    David, I agree that as woodworkers we should be aware of how we use materials and how we dispose of their waste, primarily because doing so makes good economic sense, as well as a safer environment in which to work.

    As for the climate change controversy, my very serious suggestion is to study a good geology textbook. It will be an eye-opener. The climate on this planet has been changing, sometimes radically from extremely hot to extremely cold, for over four billion years. The current shifts are nothing new, and certainly nothing extreme enough to warrant crippling the world’s economy in futile attempts to slow down natural cycles. Believing that we have the power to cause or correct even short-term changes is hubris. And despite the continued crisis-hyping, even the Met in England has admitted there has been NO rise in temps for nearly 15 years now. But you won’t hear that inconvenient truth from our politicians or media.

    Consider the Mendenhall Glacier in Alaska. It is melting, and has been for 50 years, revealing the standing stumps of a huge forest that has been covered in ice for a thousand years. Now think about how much COLDER it must have been a thousand years or more ago to create that glacier. Then think how much WARMER it must have been for hundreds or thousands of years before that to grow that huge forest? We certainly weren’t around spewing carbon dioxide into the air back then. So what caused the climate changes that allowed a mature softwood climax forest to grow, and then killed it with ice? Not us.

  • Chuck R says:

    I think that your commentator is right – that we do live in denial – that politicians do use arguments – real or imagined to control us – and I do believe that we are damaging our environment. While there is truth in these statements, the question remains how much truth?

    A simple science experiment will show that carbon dioxide will hold more heat than hydrogen and oxygen alone. Dump more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and it will certainly hold more heat than a same given volume of air not containing carbon dioxide.

    There have been periods throughout the history of earth where more carbon dioxide has been poured into the atmosphere in a matter of hours than we have contributed in the last three centuries, yet we still go on.

    Do politicians hoodwink us to control us? My god – you would have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to see that.

  • Ron Sinclair says:

    I agree that we all should do our parts to do as little damage as possible to the environment. However, I do not believe that the science is “settled” on this subject yet, and that does not make me a “denier”. I also think that no matter what we in the US and Europe may do to clean up our own acts, China and India will continue to negate all of it and then some. The net result will be ever more pollution. I am not saying that we should do nothing, I am saying that until we get everyone on board to lower all of our pollution outputs, it will not get any better.

  • Mark Slafkes says:

    Thank you for your carefully presented comments.

  • Larry says:

    Climate change.. When I put a fire in the wood stove in my house, it gets hot! Multiply that by how many billion? Either way natural or man made. The climate where I live is changing! Hotter summers.. Colder winters. More violent storms!
    When I see the way they cut every tree in a forest! They used to select cut. Now it seams they cut everything!

  • Tom says:

    Thank you.

  • Vern Tator says:

    Right on David. A very well directed and concise comment. Thanks

  • Doug says:

    The beauty of science is that it is true whether you believe it or not.

  • Chris says:

    Thank you David.

    For those who disagree I would urge you to search the internet for: ‘400 parts per million’. We’ve hit the record for the first time in human history with an average CO2 level in Earth’s atmosphere above 400 parts per million. The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were this high was from 800,000 to 15 million years ago.

    It may be true the Earth’s atmosphere has reached this level of CO2 on it’s own but the fluctuations occur over thousands of years. The disturbing fact is how rapidly we’ve exceeded this threshold. We’ve seen CO2 rise over the last several decades and it directly correlates to the industrial revolution and prolific use of fossil fuels. That is, the changes implicate human activity not natural fluctuations.

    What makes matters worse is the taboo subject of unsustainable human population growth. Early last century we had a population of approximately 1.5 billion. In 1970, world population was approximately 2.5 billion. Today, 40 short years later we’ve nearly tripled our population to exceed 7 billion.

    The extreme weather, melting ice and rising oceans are symptoms of the science which make a case encompassing data on CO2 concentrations going back millions of years. Though I would love to be wrong about climate change it would be a denial of reality given then evidence.

    Those who can’t change their minds can’t change anything — George Bernard Shaw

  • Gary Coyne says:


    Thank you for speaking the obvious. For those who do not want to believe, I am sad that they are focusing on the partisan divide that we live in.

    Sadly, people tend to believe what they want to believe even if shown the absolute facts to the contrary. “Don’t bother to show me facts, I already know what I know.”

    By no means does this attribute of “knowing more than facts” reside in any political group. Whether it’s the right-wings conviction that the science is wrong in global warming (or climate change*) or the left-wings conviction that immunization causes autism, we folks can be profoundly stupid jerks.

    * global warming versus climate change: They both are really interchangeable, there’s no difference between the two. However, a study by Yale showed that people do respond differently between the two phrases.

    As such, you’ll see different groups use the phrase that they want the listener to respond the way they want them to respond to.

    Guess which one Fox News uses?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. For more information, please see our Terms of Use.