Conservatives have a clever strategy when confronted by the near-unanimous scientific consensus on climate change: shout lies to back up your case. A recent example from Fox News:
Nothing embarrasses me more than our political system being so captive to corporate interests that we can't deal with the biggest problem of our time: accelerated climate change is reshaping the globe, and young people today will live to see real and dramatic consequences because of it.
So, for that reason, I will provide rebuttals to what this particular loon, Republican strategist Brad Blakeman, is talking about. As for that 97% of climate scientists believe in man-made climate change, here is the evidence for that: a Gallup poll. Gallup actually leaned conservative in the past election, but even then they were off by about 4 points. Even if this poll, and others like it, are off by a whopping seven points, bringing it down to 90% of climate scientists that believe in man-made climate change, that's still more of a consensus than you'll see on plenty of other issues that we can deal with apolitically, and that don't have the drastic longterm consequences of not dealing with climate change. So, when Blakeman says that he can find 10 scientists who don't believe in climate change for every one that does, where is his data? And please make it from a reputable polling firm, because it's easy enough for Fox News to cook up a poll whose wording and sampling skews it toward Big Oil profits.
As for the claim that if we invest in green energy, but China and India don't nothing will happen. That's ridiculous for two reasons. The United States is still the world's largest energy consumer, so reducing our carbon footprint will have a major direct impact. Secondly, the more competitive we become in green energy, the more China, India and other markets will work to keep up (also, China is currently the biggest buyer of solar panels, so it's us that needs to catch up) AND the more we invest in green energy, the cheaper it will become. With a focused research effort, there is a very real possibility of driving the cost of solar below that of coal.
Blakeman's broader point is essentially that all infrastructure spending should be done privately, which would be great for the super rich and terrible for the poor and middle class. I would elaborate, but I've ranted enough for one post. I'll finish with this: we need to make more noise about climate change so that it becomes a political liability to deny it, because right now those denials earn nothing but checks from Big Oil.