Climate Change Denial

RedEyedAbyss

"Yet when it comes to coverage of global warming, we are trapped in the logic of a guerrilla insurgency. The climate scientists have to be right 100 percent of the time, or their 0.01 percent error becomes Glaciergate, and they are frauds. By contrast, the deniers only have to be right 0.01 percent of the time for their narrative--See! The global warming story is falling apart!--to be reinforced by the media. It doesn't matter that their alternative theories are based on demonstrably false claims, as they are with all the leading "thinkers" in this movement."

(I recall AOD brought up a similar argument when he put up megaposts showing evidence of climate change)

Damn undue weight.

IanExMachina

It can't be globle warmin as it was a cold winter with snow lolz1!1

Tnu1138

oh come on there is no such thing as climate change!

RedEyedAbyss

[citation needed]

Tnu1138

Easy now just messign aroound I odn't know a thing about it.

ClockworkUniverse

Regarding AOD: Considering that he was banned after he (semi-accidentally) admitted to being a troll, I wouldn't use him as an example of anything, good or bad.

RedEyedAbyss

Newton was a jerk. Does that mean we should revamp the physics curriculum to ignore him?

His On-Topic Conversations posts on climate change were some of the most convincing arguments on the forum.

ClockworkUniverse

I wouldn't know much about those specific posts because I didn't see them; I'm just saying that he posted for the purpose of creating controversy, not for the purpose of being right.

Wicked223

He didn't post to create controversy all the time, that occasion included.

ClockworkUniverse

Huh. Didn't know that. Guess I never saw him at his best.

glennmagusharvey

Because denial, based on wishful thinking.  It always feels better when we are not to blame than when we are to blame.  And sometimes, we just wish that the problem didn't exist.  And sometimes, when we get desperate, we even try everything to pretend that it doesn't.

Because environmentalists tend to suck at messaging.  Guilt-tripping people is NOT a good messaging technique, but many people fail to realize that.

Because financial incentive.  Industries with major carbon emissions do not want to see their existing business model have to change.  Changing would mean major investments in new technologies, or possibly going out of business.  Also see my first point--they're also run by humans, who don't like to feel guilty.

Because status quo.  Our ways of life and many entire economies are built on readily available and easily portable energy sources.  We're used to using fossil fuels; do you like to be told to stop doing what you're used to doing?

Because more clout.  industries with major carbon emissions also tend to be well entrenched and have lots of political influence, while alternative energy industries lack that influence.  This ties in with the status quo reason.

Chagen

Or maybe it does exist, but it sure as hell ain't as extreme as the "scientists" say.

GuyInWhite

Or maybe it is rather extreme and you just don't want to be uncomfortable.

ClockworkUniverse

^^Define "extreme." If you mean "The Day After Tomorrow" extreme, nobody sane believes that. If you mean "extreme on the scales by which such things can be measured," then yes, it is.

Nyktos

@Chagen: The "scientists" have a lot more "education" in this "topic" than you, so it might be a decent "idea" to listen to them.

Chagen

INUH: My mom is watching that right now.

But that's what all the eco-nazis keep acting like it's gonna be.

Nyktos:Wasn't it proven that they actually made a bunch of lies and bullshitted everything for political purposes?

And now watch as the entire fora mobilizes against me for the crime of having a different opinion.

IanExMachina

@Chagen ;

No the email scandal was not to with creating or making up data.

Also probably not all the fora, as there must be some people who are also CCDs.

Wicked223

Did you read the article., Chagen?

Chagen

Yes, but it ended up being just conservative mudslinging.

ClockworkUniverse

^^^^Okay, if someone thinks it's going to be like that, you have every right to mock them. But that doesn't mean it's not a serious, if slightly less disaster movie-worthy, problem.

GuyInWhite

>Hasn't it proven that they actually made a bunch of lies and bullshitted everything for political purposes?

What could they possibly gain by lying about that kind of thing?

Chagen

Scaring people into voting for democrats. Make up bullshit, the democrats say they're gonna fix it, scare the public into voting to stop it.

ClockworkUniverse

But it's not bullshit. Climate change does, in fact, exist and will, in time, cause problems.

GuyInWhite

I'm going to go ahead and assume the source you used to decide that global warming is bullshit is biased.

Also, since when is scaring people into voting Democratic bad? We're the ones with the better philosophy. 

GLORIOUSLeader

Chagen, I'm honestly not trying to put you down, but from where did you get the information?

And besides, do you recognize the existence of, if not man-made global warming, some form of natural climate change? 

Wicked223

A biased source can still contain accurate information, though.

And it's not like the article in the OP is 100% neutral, either.

Chagen

INUH/GLORIOUS: I don't deny that exists.

I have my doubts that it is really as extreme as the eco-nazis say however.

Guy:Never said it was bad.

Turtle

Kind of amuses me that many of the same people who accuse Christians of using "fictional" beliefs to impose on others do something very similar with their environmentalism.

I'm not saying that rampant pollution or being wasteful or stupid or what have you is bad, but for Pete's sake, there hasn't been the kind of conclusive proof of anthropogenic climate change that those in power would like to have us think.

What's so hard about:

-Conserve, replace, and recycle resources whenever possible
-Use resources efficiently whenever not
-Don't let overblown concern that we can somehow affect the state of the global climate in any significant way guilt you into screwing the economy over.

RedEyedAbyss

"I'm not saying that rampant pollution or being wasteful or stupid or what have you is bad, but for Pete's sake, there hasn't been the kind of conclusive proof of anthropogenic climate change that those in power would like to have us think."

Why do people think that they have more authority on the subject than people that actually do the research? 97% of climate scientists believing in anthropogenic climate change is a pretty strong case.

Only politics can twist the melting of the ice caps into a socialist conspiracy.

Chagen

Of course they're going to believe in it, the democrats are lining their pockets.

In any case, eco-nazis keep acting like the world is going to become like The Day After Tommorow, when it blatantly isn't.

Bob

"eco-nazis"

...