Does bringing a snowball into congress in February mean that climate change is false? That is a question we will try to answer on today’s blog post. I’m glad to have you back today, let’s go ahead and dive into it.
James Inhofe is a senior United States senator from Oklahoma. Inhofe, a member of the Republican Party was also chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works for several years. In 2012 Inhofe published the book, “The Greatest Hoax”. This book conveys his strong opinions about global warming and how it is not actually true. In February of 2015 Inhofe chose to use a prop in congress to convey his message. He brought a snowball. He then proceeded to use the snowball to communicate that global warming was false due to the fact that it was “unseasonably cold” outside and he could therefore bring a snowball into congress. Was his logic sound?
To answer this question we must first think about what the term global warming means. Most textbooks define this as an average increase in overall global temperature. As you can see this definition does not specify a specific time of year or a specific place on Earth. Both of these specifications are ones Senator Inhofe made when producing his snowball argument. Inhofe based his argument around the fact that it was snowing in Washington DC in February. I’m sure most people will agree that snowfall in that specific situation is somewhat unusual, and definitely unexpected. Regardless, one day of snow in this city, or even a couple, probably won’t do much to bring the average overall global temperature down. The fact that Inhofe was able to produce a snowball in congress on that day does not change the fact that in 2015, out of the 16 warmest recorded years on Earth, 15 of them were from the 21st century.
So the senator’s logic was pretty flawed. Luckily, he did “go viral” pretty quickly. The fact that such an educated bureaucrat made such a big mistake became material for dozens of satirical videos. To this day there are a lot of videos still circulating the media about this incident. Why did videos about this incident become so popular? In search for the answer I read Steve Stockman’s book, how to make videos that don’t suck. Most of the satirical pieces out there are videos, they are pretty funny, and are insanely popular. So they do not suck. One of Stockman’s first claims is that any video is a transaction between the viewer and the producer. A viewer will only watch the video if they are entertained. Luckily for people producing videos about this occurrence, a senator making an erroneous claim in front of congress and national television happens to be very entertaining in and of itself. Stockman next talks about audience and how it is important to know whom you are making the video for. Even though the videos making fun of this incident are easily available to most, the material of the video suggests that this was intended for people that care about the planet and know a little about global warming. Someone that has the same misgivings about global warming will probably not enjoy a video that is equally mocking them and the senator at the same time.
For anyone out there looking for a video that talks about the issue mentioned here and wants to see an example of a high quality video that talks about other climate change issues I would redirect you to this episode of the Colbert Report. This video follows most of the tips given by Stockman in his book like appropriate shot length, constantly changing the shot to keep the audience hooked, and having a hero.
That’s all for this week and thanks again for coming. Remember to follow me on twitter @ivan96cornish for more information about climate change and things happening on social media. See you in two weeks.