Climate alarmist is a mental illness

I was wondering why the climate alarmist wouldn't follow settled science, but they go with the political science instead -
I really have no idea who you mean by "climate alarmists", particularly since your linked article never uses the term. But if you mean people like the IPCC and the world's climate scientists and those lay folks who accept their conclusions, then you have it exactly wrong.

But that's NOT who your article is discussing, is it. Did YOU read your own article? If so, why have you been pushing a false impression of what it actually says?
Many psychologists say they feel unequipped to handle a growing number of patients despairing over the state of the planet. A new contingent of mental health professionals aims to fix that.
Now you are referring to people alarmed by reality. Psychologists have difficulty treating such people because their alarm is based on real evidence. I think our psychologists time and efforts would be far better spent attempting to cure people who reject science, particularly for political reasons. Like you.
There you go, it's a known psychological problem, so I can see why Jordan Peterson was correct in saying -

People have things more on their personal purview that are more difficult to deal with and that they are avoiding and generally that the way they avoid them is by adopting pseudo moralistic stances on large scale social issues that it makes them look good to your friends and neighbours.

So conclusion is, if you know of a climate alarmist, be compassionate and try to help them through this difficult time in their life.
The conclusion is that some people have trouble coping with certain types of threats. It's a phobia, isn't it. Like people who are afraid of science. Like people who are afraid of change.

CONSERVATIVE: averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values. Oxford Language Dictionary
 
I really have no idea who you mean by "climate alarmists", particularly since your linked article never uses the term. But if you mean people like the IPCC and the world's climate scientists and those lay folks who accept their conclusions, then you have it exactly wrong.

But that's NOT who your article is discussing, is it. Did YOU read your own article? If so, why have you been pushing a false impression of what it actually says?

Now you are referring to people alarmed by reality. Psychologists have difficulty treating such people because their alarm is based on real evidence. I think our psychologists time and efforts would be far better spent attempting to cure people who reject science, particularly for political reasons. Like you.

The conclusion is that some people have trouble coping with certain types of threats. It's a phobia, isn't it. Like people who are afraid of science. Like people who are afraid of change.

CONSERVATIVE: averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values. Oxford Language Dictionary
Climate alarmists? The idiots that ignore science, believe political science and thus run around screaming how everyone else has doomed them, pretty much like you.

Do you admit you contributed to and take part in the problem that you perceive is a problem?
 
Climate alarmists? The idiots that ignore science, believe political science and thus run around screaming how everyone else has doomed them, pretty much like you.
But your linked article never used the term.
Do you admit you contributed to and take part in the problem that you perceive is a problem?
Do you admit that your English skills need work?
 
Do you admit that your English skills need work?
Which part did you struggle with.

The problem you perceive is man increasing co2, leading to climate change. You have participated in this (you've created co2 in the past) and you are currently producing co2 (still contributing to climate change). So do you admit that have done this and still doing this to the problem you perceive.

In basic English, "Do you admit you contributed to and take part in the problem that you perceive is a problem?"

If you still struggle, do you have a carer handy to explain basic English to you?

It seems that you have the brain capacity to handle one part of a question, I tend to hold multi facets of a conversation/debate and ask them all in one sentence. I apologise for your thickness. Is your husband and better, do you want to put him on??
 
Last edited:
Which part did you struggle with.

The problem you perceive is man increasing co2, leading to climate change. You have participated in this (you've created co2 in the past) and you are currently producing co2 (still contributing to climate change). So do you admit that have done this and still doing this to the problem you perceive.

In basic English, "Do you admit you contributed to and take part in the problem that you perceive is a problem?"

If you still struggle, do you have a carer handy to explain basic English to you?

It seems that you have the brain capacity to handle one part of a question, I tend to hold multi facets of a conversation/debate and ask them all in one sentence. I apologise for your thickness. Is your husband and better, do you want to put him on??
I can guarantee you that my wife has no interest in speaking with you.

Of course I have produced CO2 and still am. I produce far less than I once did and I continue to reduce my output. And I vote for people who believe we need to reduce and eventually stop GHG emissions. Do you vote for candidates that accept mainstream science on global warming or do you vote for candidates that reject mainstream science on global warming? How does it feel to reject mainstream science? Have you ever done it before on any topic? On what other subjects do you believe science has lied to us and created hoaxes to get rich and keep their favorites in power? Surely this isn't the only one.
 
Climate alarmists remind me of those who tell us there's a labor shortage....yep. whatever.
 
I can guarantee you that my wife has no interest in speaking with you.

Of course I have produced CO2 and still am. I produce far less than I once did and I continue to reduce my output. And I vote for people who believe we need to reduce and eventually stop GHG emissions. Do you vote for candidates that accept mainstream science on global warming or do you vote for candidates that reject mainstream science on global warming? How does it feel to reject mainstream science? Have you ever done it before on any topic? On what other subjects do you believe science has lied to us and created hoaxes to get rich and keep their favorites in power? Surely this isn't the only one.
Well stop causing the problem that you perceive is happening and quit making co2, practice what you preach.

I vote conservative, then UKIP, then back to conservative when Farage quit UKIP.

I embrace science, I don't embrace political science. Science provided -

Screenshot_20230908-163041.png

Political science sets the agenda and the science has to confirm, hence spikey yearly graphs, computer flawed models, and stupid predictions.

On a side note, I've noticed every alarmist prediction has flunked, so the one prediction we only get now is, "We need to cut emissions by bla bla before bla bla or there's no way back from inevitable extinction", and may I add, at perceived co2 and temperature levels at which dinosaurs and life flourished.

So you change your lifestyle, you pay green tax, you suck up the political agenda, keep me out of that crazy world.
 
Well stop causing the problem that you perceive is happening and quit making co2, practice what you preach.
What preaching do you believe I do here? Can you show me some quotes?
I vote conservative, then UKIP, then back to conservative when Farage quit UKIP.
So... you were big on Brexit? How'd that work out for you?
I embrace science, I don't embrace political science. Science provided -

View attachment 896565
Science also provided
1706873523161.png



AND

1706873595785.png


AND

1706873668202.png


AND

1706873736549.png


AND

1706873814392.png


Political science sets the agenda and the science has to confirm, hence spikey yearly graphs, computer flawed models, and stupid predictions.
What do you mean by "political science"?
What agenda has it set?
How has what science had what to confirm?
Is "spikey graph" a technical term?
How, specifically, are computer models flawed and does that differ from "computer flawed models"?
Finally, what "stupid predictions" do you believe climate scientists have made?
On a side note, I've noticed every alarmist prediction has flunked
Have atmospheric CO2 levels not increased?
Has the planet not gotten warmer?
Has sea level not risen?
Has ice not melted?
What actual climate science predictions is it that you believe have "flunked"?
How about the multiple denier predictions that warming would end? Have they flunked?
so the one prediction we only get now is, "We need to cut emissions by bla bla before bla bla or there's no way back from inevitable extinction"
Can you provide a link to, say, the IPCC warming of human extinction?
and may I add, at perceived co2 and temperature levels at which dinosaurs and life flourished.
What rates of change in CO2 and temperature did flourishing dinosaurs experience? What rates of change in CO2 and temperature are we experiencing?
So you change your lifestyle, you pay green tax, you suck up the political agenda, keep me out of that crazy world.
What lifestyle changes were required when electric light bulbs replaced candles and oil and gas lamps?
What lifestyle changes were required when automobilies replaced horses?
What lifestype changes were required when refrigerators entered homes?
What lifestyle changes were required when people put telephones in their homes?
What lifestyle changes were required when homes became centrally heated and cooled?
What lifestyle changes were required when lead paint was banned?
What lifestyle changes were required when we were required to use seat belts?
What lifestyle changes were required when we got our daily weather from satellites in orbit?
What lifestyle changes were required when the cell phone became popular?
What lifestyle changes were required by the invention of the Nickel Cadmium rechargeable battery?
What lifestyle changes were required when smart phones became popular?
What lifestyle changes were required by the invention of the Nickel Metal Hydride rechargeable battery?
What lifestyle changes were required by the invention of the Lithium Ion rechargeable battery?
What lifestyle changes were required when you began to see EVs on the road?
What lifestyle changes were required when your children grew up and you grew old?

Life's a bitch and then you die. Stop being such a whinger and get over it.
 
Last edited:
Fretting over impending doom not only makes you crazy ... it also makes you dull as dishwater.

Be original, embrace optimism.
 
Fretting over impending doom not only makes you crazy ... it also makes you dull as dishwater.

Be original, embrace optimism.
I think the prize goes to folks whinging about changes to their lifestyles.
 
What preaching do you believe I do here? Can you show me some quotes?

So... you were big on Brexit? How'd that work out for you?

Science also provided
View attachment 896574


AND

View attachment 896575

AND

View attachment 896576

AND

View attachment 896577

AND

View attachment 896579


What do you mean by "political science"?
What agenda has it set?
How has what science had what to confirm?
Is "spikey graph" a technical term?
How, specifically, are computer models flawed and does that differ from "computer flawed models"?
Finally, what "stupid predictions" do you believe climate scientists have made?

Have atmospheric CO2 levels not increased?
Has the planet not gotten warmer?
Has sea level not risen?
Has ice not melted?
What actual climate science predictions is it that you believe have "flunked"?
How about the multiple denier predictions that warming would end? Have they flunked?

Can you provide a link to, say, the IPCC warming of human extinction?

What rates of change in CO2 and temperature did flourishing dinosaurs experience? What rates of change in CO2 and temperature are we experiencing?

What lifestyle changes were required when electric light bulbs replaced candles and oil and gas lamps?
What lifestyle changes were required when automobilies replaced horses?
What lifestype changes were required when refrigerators entered homes?
What lifestyle changes were required when people put telephones in their homes?
What lifestyle changes were required when homes became centrally heated and cooled?
What lifestyle changes were required when lead paint was banned?
What lifestyle changes were required when we were required to use seat belts?
What lifestyle changes were required when we got our daily weather from satellites in orbit?
What lifestyle changes were required when the cell phone became popular?
What lifestyle changes were required by the invention of the Nickel Cadmium rechargeable battery?
What lifestyle changes were required when smart phones became popular?
What lifestyle changes were required by the invention of the Nickel Metal Hydride rechargeable battery?
What lifestyle changes were required by the invention of the Lithium Ion rechargeable battery?
What lifestyle changes were required when you began to see EVs on the road?
What lifestyle changes were required when your children grew up and you grew old?

Life's a bitch and then you die. Stop being such a whinger and get over it.

Brexit is brilliant and beneficial to the UK.

Are you on the alarmists side, mankind is dooming the planet with co2 and we're near an irreversible tipping point?

A simple yes/no will suffice.
 
Brexit is brilliant and beneficial to the UK.
That's not how it looks from over here.
Are you on the alarmists side
I am on the side of science.
mankind is dooming the planet with co2 and we're near an irreversible tipping point?
No one in mainstream science is talking about doom or extinction from global warming though it will involve extraordinary costs, massive suffering and deaths. We have already passed a tipping point or will do so shortly. Do you understand what a tipping point actually is?
A simple yes/no will suffice.
If you want a yes or a no, ask an objective question.
 
That's not how it looks from over here.

I am on the side of science.

No one in mainstream science is talking about doom or extinction from global warming though it will involve extraordinary costs, massive suffering and deaths. We have already passed a tipping point or will do so shortly. Do you understand what a tipping point actually is?

If you want a yes or a no, ask an objective question.
I'll dumb it down, mankind is dooming the planet with co2 and we're near an irreversible tipping point?

Do you agree, yes or no?

A side note, when people do multi quotes, I ignore 99% of their shite post. I know what I wrote, I don't need to re-read it again in snippet form intersected with shite. So please make one reply or ignore my posts.
 
I'll dumb it down,
That wasn't the direction it needed to move.
mankind is dooming the planet with co2 and we're near an irreversible tipping point?
We may be near - to either side - of a tipping point concerning the AMOC. I have no idea what you might mean by "dooming the planet".
Do you agree, yes or no?
I will give you a yes or no answer when you ask an objective question.
A side note, when people do multi quotes, I ignore 99% of their shite post. I know what I wrote, I don't need to re-read it again in snippet form intersected with shite. So please make one reply or ignore my posts.
When you use descriptions and terminology that I would not, that carries its own subjective baggage, you're going to get quotation marks. Quit your fucking whining.
 
I was wondering why the climate alarmist wouldn't follow settled science, but they go with the political science instead -


Many psychologists say they feel unequipped to handle a growing number of patients despairing over the state of the planet. A new contingent of mental health professionals aims to fix that.

There you go, it's a known psychological problem, so I can see why Jordan Peterson was correct in saying -

People have things more on their personal purview that are more difficult to deal with and that they are avoiding and generally that the way they avoid them is by adopting pseudo moralistic stances on large scale social issues that it makes them look good to your friends and neighbours.

So conclusion is, if you know of a climate alarmist, be compassionate and try to help them through this difficult time in their life.
Did you mean to title this thread:

Climate Alarmism is a Mental Illness

or perhaps

Climate Alarmists Suffer a Mental Illness

or is that title exactly what you wanted?
 
Did you mean to title this thread:

Climate Alarmism is a Mental Illness

or perhaps

Climate Alarmists Suffer a Mental Illness

or is that title exactly what you wanted?
Climate alarmist is a mental illness, just like the trannies.

So you're on tranny level.
 
I was wondering why the climate alarmist wouldn't follow settled science, but they go with the political science instead -


Many psychologists say they feel unequipped to handle a growing number of patients despairing over the state of the planet. A new contingent of mental health professionals aims to fix that.

There you go, it's a known psychological problem, so I can see why Jordan Peterson was correct in saying -

People have things more on their personal purview that are more difficult to deal with and that they are avoiding and generally that the way they avoid them is by adopting pseudo moralistic stances on large scale social issues that it makes them look good to your friends and neighbours.

So conclusion is, if you know of a climate alarmist, be compassionate and try to help them through this difficult time in their life.
When you keep telling people that life as we know will be severely diminished or non existent if we don't do what the 'woke' climate religionist demand, a certain percentage of those are so clueless and gullible that they believe it. And yes, such people can become depressed and/or anxious. Kids are especially susceptible to that kind of propaganda because they have less inclination to search out the facts on the subject but just believe what they are indoctrinated with.

Those with the intellectual honesty and critical thinking skills who do research as well as they are able to get and evaluate all the facts on the subject are rarely depressed or anxious about climate change. They become depressed and anxious at the totalitarianism the climate religionists are forcing on us that do nothing to stop climate change but do everything to take away liberties, choices, options, opportunities.
 
When you keep telling people that life as we know will be severely diminished or non existent if we don't do what the 'woke' climate religionist demand, a certain percentage of those are so clueless and gullible that they believe it. And yes, such people can become depressed and/or anxious. Kids are especially susceptible to that kind of propaganda because they have less inclination to search out the facts on the subject but just believe what they are indoctrinated with.

Those with the intellectual honesty and critical thinking skills who do research as well as they are able all the facts on the subject are rarely depressed or anxious about climate change. They become depressed and anxious at the totalitarianism the climate religionists are forcing on us that do nothing to stop climate change but do everything to take away liberties, choices, options, opportunities.
The climate alarmist is a vulnerable group in society, preyed upon by the politicians and retards. They are are led to believe humans are on the cuss of dooming our fate due to nasty cars.

Are you one of these credulous retards?
 
The climate alarmist is a vulnerable group in society, preyed upon by the politicians and retards. They are are led to believe humans are on the cuss of dooming our fate due to nasty cars.

Are you one of these credulous retards?
Does my post make you think I am a credulous retard?
 

Forum List

Back
Top