Actually, I like golf. I used to play it from time to time and enjoyed it immensely. It’s just not as easy to do when you live in Toronto (as I do) and have other, more pressing priorities.
**********
Regardless, the truth is that a lot of golfers are really stupid, at least if global warming denial is any indication (and I think it is):
NPR commentator Frank Deford had a segment this morning about golf courses, in which he cited a Golf Digest poll showing that 41 percent of golfers believe global warming to be a myth.
This number struck me as surprisingly high. But then I did a little digging and discovered that, while an April Pew poll found that 71 percent of Americans say there is “solid evidence” the earth is getting warmer, only 49 percent of Republicans now believe that to be the case. More intriguing, Pew found the number of Republican skeptics to be on the rise–up 13 percentage points from a similar poll conducted in January 2007.
So if you assume that most golfers are Republicans, the stat makes perfect sense.
That’s from TNR’s Michelle Cottle. I suspect her assumption is a valid one, though I’d like to see some numbers before passing judgement.
And there are other factors at play here. I assume that golfers are, in general, wealthier than non-golfers. This may make them Republican, or more likely to be Republican (and it is troubling that so many Republicans are global-warming deniers), but, if they’ve made their money in the corporate sector, it may also make them more likely to deny the truth of global warming and more likely to accept, say, oil-industry propaganda.
I assume, too, that golfers are, in general, older than non-golfers. This may also make them more likely to deny the truth of global warming and, more broadly, to be less environmentalist.
But the truth will get them yet. Here’s the title of Michelle’s post: “Just wait until their greens dry up.” I wonder if she intended a double (triple?) meaning here. The “green” they care about is money, not the environment. With a warming planet and changing climate, many of their golf courses will indeed dry up — the ones located in warmer parts of the world.
But, rapacious capitalists that many of them are, their other “green,” the money, will dry up, too. Some will no doubt profit off environmental catastrophe — that’s always the way, isn’t it? — but large-scale economic collapse could (and likely would) parallel any such catastrophe. And then what? Well, I guess they wouldn’t be able to afford the greens fees anymore.
Assuming there are any greens left.
(Cross-posted from The Reaction.)
You must have missed the moveon.org memo where you are suppose to call it climate change instead of global warming. I assume that many of the polls ask the question about climate change instead of about global warming specifically.
Yes, climate change is more precise, since some areas are cooling or experiencing heavy rains, such as the Midwest, while other places are sweltering and dry, like the Southwest, already in a worse drought than the dust bowl. The warmer waters in the Gulf of Mexico will continue to spawn savage storms and warmer ground temperatures in tornado alley are ratcheting up the intensity of twisters in the same way.
Either way its a total lie made up by Big Research to secure more grants from the gov't and line their pockets. Its fortunate we have all those industrial giants to fund research that shows us how its all made up and the glaciers are just disappearing cuz thats what happens now and then.
It's the Evil-Human-Created Climate Change Crisis! We're cooking the planet!
The foregoing, the second of which was actually heard by me when listening to NPR, and other global-warming-as-gospel fellow-traveling baggage, are among the _true_ examples of stupidity related to this hyped PC fad with more fanaticism behind it than any that behind the slander directed toward the vast horde of buyers and leasers of SUVs over the past several years.
Stick with sane issues, such as (real) air pollution. The closer we get to producing nothing but carbon dioxide and water from consuming hydrocarbons, or from future substitute fuels, the better. And why aren't the (worthless PC) hypocrites demanding we change from coal and gas to nuclear power plants?
Just in case anyone else reading the thread hasn't left their house since the mid 90s, support for reducing green house emissions does not mean supporting nuclear power. That stuff is highly contentious all around.
[...] themoderatevoice.com No tags for this post. Related Posts [...]