Why do people deny science?

[flacaltenn]

No one should be so committed to their understanding of climate that they can not change their position based on available evidence.

LMHAO -- at that last line bud.. Some are so committed to "their" understanding, that they can IGNORE evidence to the contrary placed right in their lap... And "their" understanding has more to do with polling and Press Releases than the science..

Exactly.

Everyone should be willing to step back from what they might 'like' to believe, and look at what the science and numbers suggest. It applies equally to left and right.

And yet we still have posters on this board who deny that 97% of the world's glaciers are in decline, and others who claim that is completely normal.

I dont know if it's a cultural barrier (what with you living in Finland and all ) or you are truly oblivious to the fact that we are all laughing at that statement.. You really seem to have no idea ---- even AFTER OddBall gave you free psychoanalyisis, and WestWall gave you a universal hint from Classical Literature -- that that statement is one of the most funny examples of "defensive psychological projection" ever witnessed in a public place..

Lemme help you again.. From the Wiki on Psychological Projection..

Psychological projection was first conceptualized by Sigmund Freud as a defence mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves psychically expelling one's negative qualities onto others, and is a common psychological process.[1][2] Theoretically, projection and the related projective identification reduces anxiety by allowing the unconscious expression of the unwanted unconscious impulses or desires through displacement

But whatever you do --- PLEASE keep up badgering us and lecturing us about being closed minded and not moved by the facts of the real world.. If is wasn't entertaining -- you'd be on IGNORE a year ago "when the grapes were DYING of Global Warming in Australia"..

 

[flacaltenn]

If you are going to 'apply' something like warming, then you need to apply it to China, the EU, the Middle East, and every other industrialized country on the plant. Sadly, Europeans see themselves and the rest of the world as exempt from the problem. And they are not, they are as much a part of it as anyone else. I personally have been sickened by the brown air in Cairo and Beijing. Never saw brown air in the US, and I've covered most of it.

I couldn't agree more - although given the EU has much tighter restrictions on emissions than any other region on earth, I don't know why you say Europeans see themselves as exempt!!

It's a global issue, and all countries have their role to play.

btw. You never saw brown air flying into LA? Really?

The first European explorer to set foot in Los Angeles saw it too...

San Pedro « California Pioneer Heritage Foundation

The Portuguese navigator sailing under the commission of Spain, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, arrived in the area on October 8, 1542. The ship’s log recorded: “ The Sunday following…they came to the mainland in a large bay, which they named “Bahia de los Fumos” [Bay of Smokes] on account of the many smokes they saw there. Here they engaged in intercourse with some Indians they captured in a canoe. The bay is thirty-five degrees latitude; it is an excellent harbor and the country is good with many plains and groves of trees.”3 Although it is uncertain as to which bay he had reference, most local historians ignore the ambiguity of this account and state that San Pedro is this bay.4 5 1821-1921, PhD Thesis, University of Minnesota, 1963, p. 16. The strengths of the different points of view are presented. The smokes could have been from small fires the Indians used to drive small game into the open6 or perhaps from burning huts.7 Cabrillo only spent a day in the harbor before heading north.

Probably glad to get out of the smog..

 

[Saigon]

Flac -

Do you consider yourself open minded?

My guess is that you do.

However, pelting anyone who holds a different opinion from yours with condescension and abuse might not be the best way to prove anything but your own myopia.

And yes - Australian wine producers did destroy their own grape crops after the impact of climate change/droughts rendered wine production in the district non-viable. It's a fact. Laugh all you like, Mr Open Minded.

 

[flacaltenn]

Flac -

Do you consider yourself open minded?

My guess is that you do.

However, pelting anyone who holds a different opinion from yours with condescension and abuse might not be the best way to prove anything but your own myopia.

And yes - Australian wine producers did destroy their own grape crops after the impact of climate change/droughts rendered wine production in the district non-viable. It's a fact. Laugh all you like, Mr Open Minded.

Bumper wine crops were delivered from Australia in the years you quoted.. The Australian Wine associations worried about "overproduction".. If ANY farmers destroyed ANY fields it was because of a GLUT of wine on the market in those years..

Can't change your OPINIONS pal -- but I DONT have to suffer your ignorance or bad facts..

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -


Thanks for proving my point.

Proving your point? Are you crazy? I say that the ice has been melting for 14,000 years which puts your idea that man is somehow responsible into the dumpster where it belongs and you show a chart showing ice since 1980? Again, what's your point?

Your are presenting a position held by virtually no one at all, and one contradicted by virtually all research conducted into glaciers during the past 50 years. We saw years of net increase in ice as recently as the 1980's.

Again, the ice has been melting back for 14,000 years now. There have been periods where it was melted back much further than the present as evidenced by the number of human settlements exposed by the melting...it comes and goes..that is what happens to ice on earth. We are not responsible for its advance or retreat.

Given that you must know this, the only reason that I can imagine for you to be backing a claim you know to be false is politics.

If glaciers have never melted back further than they are at present, how do you explain human settlements being revealed by the melting? How did they get there?

I think a single chart here will suffice to establish how off-base your claim is:

A chart that goes all the way back to the 1980's? How stupid are you?

 

[Wake]

Science doesn't irrefutably rule out the existence of a god(s). It doesn't prove it, either.

The only gods science has proven thus far are the Higgs Boson (God) particles.

 

[westwall]

Flac -

Do you consider yourself open minded?

My guess is that you do.

However, pelting anyone who holds a different opinion from yours with condescension and abuse might not be the best way to prove anything but your own myopia.

And yes - Australian wine producers did destroy their own grape crops after the impact of climate change/droughts rendered wine production in the district non-viable. It's a fact. Laugh all you like, Mr Open Minded.

Pot, meet kettle.....

 

[flacaltenn]

Science doesn't irrefutably rule out the existence of a god(s). It doesn't prove it, either.

The only gods science has proven thus far are the Higgs Boson (God) particles.

Since you brought Him into it.... I always find it amazing that folks who knock people of faith, have NO PROBLEM with things like the Big Bang Theory (a fine TV show and one of the few things that gets me to laugh nowadays).

So --- believing that ALL of the mass and energy in the entire universe fit into a space smaller than a pinhead prior to ignition --- takes NO faith at all.. I'd sooner believe that Moses parted the Red Sea.. That's not the ONLY accepted science that's usually consumed mostly on faith...

 

[Wake]

Since you brought Him into it.... I always find it amazing that folks who knock people of faith, have NO PROBLEM with things like the Big Bang Theory (a fine TV show and one of the few things that gets me to laugh nowadays).

So --- believing that ALL of the mass and energy in the entire universe fit into a space smaller than a pinhead prior to ignition --- takes NO faith at all.. I'd sooner believe that Moses parted the Red Sea.. That's not the ONLY accepted science that's usually consumed mostly on faith...

You may be making an assumption, if you assume I'm either religious, agnostic, or atheistic. One doesn't have to have a stake in either of them to bring thoughts on this issue to the table.

Religions require faith. Theories require speculation. Some things are beyond knowing.

 

[SSDD]

Science doesn't irrefutably rule out the existence of a god(s). It doesn't prove it, either.

The only gods science has proven thus far are the Higgs Boson (God) particles.

Since you brought Him into it.... I always find it amazing that folks who knock people of faith, have NO PROBLEM with things like the Big Bang Theory (a fine TV show and one of the few things that gets me to laugh nowadays).

So --- believing that ALL of the mass and energy in the entire universe fit into a space smaller than a pinhead prior to ignition --- takes NO faith at all.. I'd sooner believe that Moses parted the Red Sea.. That's not the ONLY accepted science that's usually consumed mostly on faith...

Or that for just a little while the speed of light was suspended...among other things. The big bang requires more miracles than the Genesis creation.

 

[Bfgrn]

Does this sound familiar?



SNIP:
The Green Nazis: Environmentalism in the Third Reich


It has been elaborately pointed out how the device of environmentalism is especially favoured by tyrants as a means of controlling their subjects. The current 'green' movement, as we know, is no exception. It has been nurtured from its very conception as a systematic eugenics operation by the deep pockets of the Rockefeller- and Ford Foundations. Throughout the 20th century there have been multiple examples of tyrants implementing a very strict environmental policy to which their subjects had to conform, sometimes through the collection of taxes, sometimes at the barrel of a gun; usually a subtle mixture of the two. It is a well documented though seldom highlighted fact that the Nazis were very much into environmentalism- not for environmentalism's sake of course, but rather as a means of oppression and control. As it turns out, environmentalism fits the form of tyranny like a well tailored suit.

all of it here
The Green Nazis: Environmentalism in the Third Reich - Minnesotans For Global Warming

Hitler’s Green Killing Machine
Hitler?s Green Killing Machine

SOUND FAMILAR PEOPLE?

Scratch an environmentalist whackaloon and watch a eugenicist bleed.

Scratch the calls of 'Godwin' when you right wing turds do it...

 

[westwall]

And when the lefties have really lost the plot they claim Godwins law to try and cover there ass and here we have it! So typical, and so, so predictable.

Must suck to be an anti-science global warming kook....