Another Tool of the Left: Denialism

"That is exactly what the Green New Deal does. Unable to control the dynamic disruptive changes in the global oil-and-gas industry that our high-tech economies depend on, the Left pretends that there is work-around “Green” energy system that can replace fossil fuels with wind and solar devices that don’t scale up and which require fossil fuels to make and deploy. It’s slick and grandiosely hypothetical (i.e., wishful thinking), and the net effect of this major crusade will be to hasten the collapse and impoverishment of our society (ergo: the punishment).

The argument on AGW isn't being presented in a sophisticated way, because the audience isn't sophisticated.

But beyond that, there's no interest in learning the facts on account of the facts aren't what the denialists want to hear.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: DBA
The argument on AGW isn't being presented in a sophisticated way, because the audience isn't sophisticated.

But beyond that, there's no interest in learning the facts on account of the facts aren't what the denialists want to hear.

There's nothing sophisticated about it other than sophisticated propaganda to confuse the masses. Our atmosphere is changing along with several other planets in our solar system. Our sun is changing and is a major factor in these atmospheric changes. If you have just a tad bit of common sense you can easily see the glowarm scam.
 
There's nothing sophisticated about it other than sophisticated propaganda to confuse the masses. Our atmosphere is changing along with several other planets in our solar system. Our sun is changing and is a major factor in these atmospheric changes. If you have just a tad bit of common sense you can easily see the glowarm scam.
Well Ms. trout, that settles it!
 
Vice may not be a reliable source.

Humanity has only had the ability to observe events on the sun for roughly 300 years.

But first, the important question concerning 'Vice'?
 
Vice may not be a reliable source.

Humanity has only had the ability to observe events on the sun for roughly 300 years.

But first, the important question concerning 'Vice'?

That wasn't an op ed. Thats coming straight from the the solar dynamics observatory.

 
That wasn't an op ed. Thats coming straight from the the solar dynamics observatory.

I can trust and believe in science most of the time but here's a case in which I'm expected to bellieve in a questionable site, and second hand information from you.

Extremism in America has called for much more caution on what we believe.

Perhaps I'll investigate further when I have time?
 
Dems are using 'climate change' to push for tax increases and expansion of government. It's an ends to a means. Meanwhile the so called science is full of holes, because the whole damn thing is faked up nonsense.
 
I can trust and believe in science most of the time but here's a case in which I'm expected to bellieve in a questionable site, and second hand information from you.

Extremism in America has called for much more caution on what we believe.

Perhaps I'll investigate further when I have time?
I try and verify everything. This was an easy couple of clicks. Might mean nothing at all. A mass ejection getting caught in the polar winds on one of the suns poles is strange though. Ya never know what you'll find here.
 
I try and verify everything. This was an easy couple of clicks. Might mean nothing at all. A mass ejection getting caught in the polar winds on one of the suns poles is strange though. Ya never know what you'll find here.
More significant to me at this time is the very noticable improvement of the forum today with some of the worst offenders turning to politeness! This reaction of yours is a good example.
 
Ignoring facts and denying they ever happened should not be part of any argument. When someone thinks they have the power to do that there is something terribly wrong.


As with misinformation, labeling someone who disagrees with the current standardthink as a “denier” has become, pardon the term, endemic amongst the woke.

Example:
If used in its initial meaning, a climate denier would be one who claims the climate doesn’t exist, an election denier would a person who said the 2020 election never happened.

And no – that’s not what is being claimed.

The debate over climate change is one that should be taken seriously and done impartially; the discussion around the glaring voting security issues that appeared in 2020 should be considered similarly. The science denier epithet attached to anyone who wondered about the risk and efficacy of the COVID vaccines is especially egregious because “science” cannot, by definition, be believed or denied – while technically a noun it is in fact a verb, it is a process and one cannot “follow the science,” just as one cannot follow a car one is driving.

Climate denier/denialism implies ostrich-like stupidity – how can a person possibly disagree with the fact that we’re all either going to drown or burn or freeze or dehydrate or starve or flood or desert or disease or war ourselves to death in the next few decades unless we do something NOW? Never mind that doing most of the things proposed NOW are unnecessary, contradictory, contra-indicated, and could end modern civilization as we know it and that, considering the utterly scientifically shoddy if not outright fraudulent actions many in the climate brigade have taken, should not even be included in any rational discussion of the topic.

The same is true with election denier. The 2020 election was quite possibly the most unusual election in the nation’s history. Barriers put in place years ago to try to ensure secure and accurate voting were obliterated, massive numbers of ballot were mailed out practically willy-nilly, the unconscionable practice of ballot harvesting was normalized in many states, counts were stopped and started and dragged on for days and on and on. Just these undisputed facts alone are enough for intelligent reasonable involved citizens to legitimately wonder if the election was truly fair and honest.

And it should be noted that in all three cases – climate, election, and science – that those who toss the “denier” term about are also those same people who ignore, denigrate, and outright block any attempt to actually figure out what exactly happened. Remember: If you can evade any impartial investigation, you can declare with confidence that no investigation has ever found fault with your claims of the final and definitive and certain truth of your position.

Why can't intelligent people see this? Are we fresh out of those here?

You keep trying to pass off your right wing lies as “dissent”. The “alternative facts” the right are promoting are not “dissent”.

Denying that Joe Biden won the election isn’t dissent, it’s a lie. The results of the election are proven, certified and ratified.

I’ll bet you think the notion that smoking cigarettes causes cancer is open to interpretation as well. For generations, tobacco companies tried to claim that it was your right to smoke, that smoking wasn’t bad for you, and it was all a matter of opinion.

Now they’re doing it with climate change and vaccines and Covid. Anything that would force them to change the way they’re living today.
 
You keep trying to pass off your right wing lies as “dissent”. The “alternative facts” the right are promoting are not “dissent”.

Denying that Joe Biden won the election isn’t dissent, it’s a lie. The results of the election are proven, certified and ratified.

I’ll bet you think the notion that smoking cigarettes causes cancer is open to interpretation as well. For generations, tobacco companies tried to claim that it was your right to smoke, that smoking wasn’t bad for you, and it was all a matter of opinion.

Now they’re doing it with climate change and vaccines and Covid. Anything that would force them to change the way they’re living today.
No one should force anyone in America. You just don't get it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top