Why do liberals have to make up climate change?

[Brian_1349]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Could it be that... no no it couldn't be... well maybe... could it be that liberals ACTUALLY BELIEVE THE EVIDENCE AND THAT SOMETHING MUST BE DONE?!!!

No nvm it HAS to be about politics. Because with conservatives, it's ALWAYS about politics and they don't understand anything else. God will take care of the world with his magic anyways right?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

If climate change isn't happening, then doing things to prevent it wont have any consequences.

If climate change is happening, and we do nothing, we're dead.

 

[Nemo]

"Seeing Is Believing." Watch this short video, and see for yourself:
James Balog Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss Talk Video TED.com

 

[Obiwan]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

Actually, climate change is important to Liberals because it gives Obama something to blame ISIS and Boka Haram on.....

Say What Obama Links Global Warming to Boko Haram ISIS Truth Revolt

 

[mamooth]

According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.

No, the vast majority of conservatives get no money out of it. Most conservatives deny it because solely because their political cult told them to do that. A few at the top are influenced by the vast sums of cash, and they hand out the orders to those below. Any conservative who doesn't obey gets banished from of the herd, so they all fall in line.

In contrast, the rational people -- a category that cuts across all political persuasions all across the world -- ignore the politics, and go with the facts and data. If the leaders of the Democratic Party suddenly denied global warming, it would have no influence on how the rational people see the science.

 

[Pogo]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

Good question. I think it has something to do with Al Gore maneuvering his way into absolute power (inventing the internets wasn't enough) so that he can set up the brown shirt company that will dress everybody when we're all marched into FEMA camps and forced to eat arugula while singing The Internationale. Last I heard that's scheduled for next Tuesday.

 

[Pogo]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

If climate change isn't happening, then doing things to prevent it wont have any consequences.

If climate change is happening, and we do nothing, we're dead.

Exactly. The worst that could happen is we clean up the place. Oh the horror.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why do liberals have to make up climate change?

Money....power.
If they were really worried about CO2, they'd support building 100 new nuke plants.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

If climate change isn't happening, then doing things to prevent it wont have any consequences.

If climate change is happening, and we do nothing, we're dead.

Exactly. The worst that could happen is we clean up the place. Oh the horror.

Our place gets cleaner all the time.
Get China and India to reduce their CO2, damage their economy, we'll wait.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Seeing Is Believing." Watch this short video, and see for yourself:
James Balog Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss Talk Video TED.com

Do you have a video of the Chicago glacier melting?

 

[Pogo]

Why do liberals have to make up climate change?

Money....power.
If they were really worried about CO2, they'd support building 100 new nuke plants.

-- because when you're generating energy, there's just nothing like having a good waste product that's going to sit around and be lethal for a period longer than humans have existed. What could possibly go wrong....

 

[hipeter924]

According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.

No, the vast majority of conservatives get no money out of it. Most conservatives deny it because solely because their political cult told them to do that. A few at the top are influenced by the vast sums of cash, and they hand out the orders to those below. Any conservative who doesn't obey gets banished from of the herd, so they all fall in line.

In contrast, the rational people -- a category that cuts across all political persuasions all across the world -- ignore the politics, and go with the facts and data. If the leaders of the Democratic Party suddenly denied global warming, it would have no influence on how the rational people see the science.

Being anti-science is a rite of passage for the GOP.

They have four ways to do this:

1) Believe that the world is less than five thousand years old, that cavemen rode dinosaurs, and deny the clear evidence all around us to the contrary.
2) Rage against stem cell research, and attack it, despite the potential to allow people to walk again, and all those lovely things that make people happy.
3) Attack abortion procedures throughout the county, so that we revert to the middle ages method of drowning babies in barrels or flooding orphanages with unwanted babies.
4) Attack climate change, global warming, or any scientific concept that might bring a halt to convential exploit the earth ideas favored by corporate GOP donors.

You can't be a GOP electoral candidate without doing/believing one of the four, so the GOP tends to scare off a lot of people.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

Well you couldn't be more wrong, Mal

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why do liberals have to make up climate change?

Money....power.
If they were really worried about CO2, they'd support building 100 new nuke plants.

-- because when you're generating energy, there's just nothing like having a good waste product that's going to sit around and be lethal for a period longer than humans have existed. What could possibly go wrong....

But...but...CO2. LOL!

We can reprocess the waste. Recycle the U and Pu. Bury the dangerous stuff.
The lethal stuff doesn't last 10,000 years. A couple of hundred years is plenty for it to mostly decay.
Or we could use Thorium.
If it weren't for Dingy Harry, we could already store stuff at Yucca.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.

No, the vast majority of conservatives get no money out of it. Most conservatives deny it because solely because their political cult told them to do that. A few at the top are influenced by the vast sums of cash, and they hand out the orders to those below. Any conservative who doesn't obey gets banished from of the herd, so they all fall in line.

In contrast, the rational people -- a category that cuts across all political persuasions all across the world -- ignore the politics, and go with the facts and data. If the leaders of the Democratic Party suddenly denied global warming, it would have no influence on how the rational people see the science.

Being anti-science is a rite of passage for the GOP.

They have four ways to do this:

1) Believe that the world is less than five thousand years old, that cavemen rode dinosaurs, and deny the clear evidence all around us to the contrary.
2) Rage against stem cell research, and attack it, despite the potential to allow people to walk again, and all those lovely things that make people happy.
3) Attack abortion procedures throughout the county, so that we revert to the middle ages method of drowning babies in barrels or flooding orphanages with unwanted babies.
4) Attack climate change, global warming, or any scientific concept that might bring a halt to convential exploit the earth ideas favored by corporate GOP donors.

You can't be a GOP electoral candidate without doing/believing one of the four, so the GOP tends to scare off a lot of people.

Rage against stem cell research, and attack it,

Adult stem cells are really cool. Getting useful tools from them all the time.
Embryonic stem cells, from what I've seen, haven't worked and have killed the recipients, in several cases.

Attack climate change, global warming, or any scientific concept that might bring a halt to convential exploit the earth ideas

Feel free to stop emitting CO2 at any time. You could start with your computer.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Seeing Is Believing." Watch this short video, and see for yourself:
James Balog Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss Talk Video TED.com

Do you have a video of the Chicago glacier melting?

Yet another Antarctic ice mass is becoming destabilized scientists report - The Washington Post

Will this ^^^ do?

 

[Pogo]

) Believe that the world is less than five thousand years old, that cavemen rode dinosaurs, and deny the clear evidence all around us to the contrary.

Simple minds are easily snookered...

​

Being anti-science is a rite of passage for the GOP.

They have four ways to do this:

1) Believe that the world is less than five thousand years old, that cavemen rode dinosaurs, and deny the clear evidence all around us to the contrary.
2) Rage against stem cell research, and attack it, despite the potential to allow people to walk again, and all those lovely things that make people happy.
3) Attack abortion procedures throughout the county, so that we revert to the middle ages method of drowning babies in barrels or flooding orphanages with unwanted babies.
4) Attack climate change, global warming, or any scientific concept that might bring a halt to convential exploit the earth ideas favored by corporate GOP donors.

This is exactly why I keep this sigline ↓

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Seeing Is Believing." Watch this short video, and see for yourself:
James Balog Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss Talk Video TED.com

Do you have a video of the Chicago glacier melting?

Yet another Antarctic ice mass is becoming destabilized scientists report - The Washington Post

Will this ^^^ do?

No, the Chicago glacier was a bit north of Antarctica.

 

[SwimExpert]

Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is still one question I would like to ask you.
According to liberals, conservatives deny climate change for one purpose only: to fawn corporations and get a portion of their money.
But what about liberals? What is their motivation according to conservatives? To my mind liberals have no motivation to make up climate change if it really doesn't exist simply because liberal politicians are not getting anything from enterprise 'Climate change'.

The present day school of thought known as "man-made global warming" and similar monikers, seems to really boil down to one fundamental error: An arrogant over-belief in humanity's ability for science.

This "over" belief is an extreme overestimation in the perceived ability to track, quantify, and account for every and any variable of any magnitude whatsoever. In essence, it is a rejection of the principle of chaos. Some might view it as a human conquering of chaos. Theoretically, it would be possible for humans to track the precise movements through the atmosphere of a single molecule of carbon dioxide forward or backward over any amount of time. All you have to do is take every last variable into account and calculate. The problem, of course, is that we don't have the ability to identify every last variable. We don't even have the ability to even fathom the sum total of variables.

But the man-global warming camp doesn't understand that, and instead overestimate humanity's ability for science. They have no qualms about taking whatever variables are available and wielding them as if it were the end all and be all. The overestimation is then taken a step further and becomes a dogmatic affirmation that anything a person claims in the name of science is instantly true and beyond contestation, because it's science. The irony is that this overestimation of humanity's abilities for science is actually an introductory level comprehension. It's very much like a teenager thinking they know everything just because they've come to understand one or two things. They learned a thing or two in second grade science class and realized it was pretty cool the things that science can teach us, and came to a new way of thinking and looking at the world; a scientific way. But the broadening of their horizons stopped at step one, and they've continued on their calculations with step one level thinking ever since. They've confused quantity with quality. If they calculate out 1000 places they think that they have achieved 1000 levels of advancement in thought and understanding.