Why do so many people deny climate change

[skookerasbil]

[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/1005294_437232729708878_1258669765_n-1.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[Mr. H.]

The right wing thinks 75% of scientists have no integrity.

And they think that big oil corporations and people like Donald Trump, do.

"Big Oil" is essentially non-existent in the U.S. It is the Independents that are the workhorses of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons within our nation. Independent as in non-integrated non-multinational concerns. Calm down, do your homework, and get a grip.

 

[daveman]

One thing is undeniable for everybody. We will run out of fossil fuels.

Before that, as various FFs deplete, we have to define and construct a completely new, and sustainable energy infrastructure. I'm thinking that, like the building of our present system, will take 100-200 years.

What do you think?

Possibly. Wind and solar simply can't provide the kind of power we need to replace fossil fuels. And they're useless for transportation purposes.

Actually they are very good sources for transportation seeing as most driving gets done during the day. People don't realize the energy storage capacity of millions of electric cars.

Electric cars don't eliminate pollution; they merely relocate the source.

But have you seen an electric vehicle that can replace these?

Battery technology will have to improve by several orders of magnitude before these types of vehicles can run off electric motors.

And as far as electric passenger vehicles go, they're simply not practical yet, either. Limited range, too high a cost. A Chevy Volt is fine in the city -- out here in rural areas? Not so much.

 

[daveman]

Dave bro.......you're debating a bonafide mental case here. I thought Chris was as nutty as could be humanly possible but........and shit.....this guy makes Rolling Thunder look like he has his feet on the ground!!!

PMZ has settled down this evening, and it's enjoyable to talk with him. I hope he keeps it up.

 

[Stephanie]

good grief, who the hell is denying climate change?

they act like this is something new that mother earth just started doing...I haven't noticed a huge change in the climate, but so what if it does

man has adapted before and I suppose they will again....

and for sure we don't need a bunch of uneducated politicians who haven't studied in earth science, meteorology, etc leading the way for us on how to adapt..Al bore is a perfect example...His family go their wealth from a ZINC mine they owned...and now he is preaching we must save the earth...and blaming the people in this country for the reason it is happening

 

[landholder]

Science for science not science for an agenda!!!

 

[PMZ]

Stephen Foley: Americans don't want electric cars, even as a gift - Business Comment - Business - The Independent


Most American males wouldn't drive an electric car if you paid them!!!!!

Wait until $10 per gal gas. Even you'll be driving electric. I know that your attitude about Americans is that they're all like you. You're wrong about that. Most are much smarter.

 

[PMZ]

Possibly. Wind and solar simply can't provide the kind of power we need to replace fossil fuels. And they're useless for transportation purposes.

Actually they are very good sources for transportation seeing as most driving gets done during the day. People don't realize the energy storage capacity of millions of electric cars.

Electric cars don't eliminate pollution; they merely relocate the source.

But have you seen an electric vehicle that can replace these?

Battery technology will have to improve by several orders of magnitude before these types of vehicles can run off electric motors.

And as far as electric passenger vehicles go, they're simply not practical yet, either. Limited range, too high a cost. A Chevy Volt is fine in the city -- out here in rural areas? Not so much.

Between then and now they'll run on CNG.

 

[PMZ]

The right wing thinks 75% of scientists have no integrity.

And they think that big oil corporations and people like Donald Trump, do.

"Big Oil" is essentially non-existent in the U.S. It is the Independents that are the workhorses of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons within our nation. Independent as in non-integrated non-multinational concerns. Calm down, do your homework, and get a grip.

Tell that to Exxon Mobil. They won't agree.

 

[landholder]

Is climate change the new "buzz word"? I have a broken clock that is right twice a day! Climate change could be colder or hotter, wetter or dryer! I have a broken clock that is right twice a day!

 

[PMZ]

Possibly. Wind and solar simply can't provide the kind of power we need to replace fossil fuels. And they're useless for transportation purposes.

Actually they are very good sources for transportation seeing as most driving gets done during the day. People don't realize the energy storage capacity of millions of electric cars.

Electric cars don't eliminate pollution; they merely relocate the source.

But have you seen an electric vehicle that can replace these?

Battery technology will have to improve by several orders of magnitude before these types of vehicles can run off electric motors.

And as far as electric passenger vehicles go, they're simply not practical yet, either. Limited range, too high a cost. A Chevy Volt is fine in the city -- out here in rural areas? Not so much.

The operative word is yet.

 

[Mr. H.]

And they think that big oil corporations and people like Donald Trump, do.

"Big Oil" is essentially non-existent in the U.S. It is the Independents that are the workhorses of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons within our nation. Independent as in non-integrated non-multinational concerns. Calm down, do your homework, and get a grip.

Tell that to Exxon Mobil. They won't agree.

You don't know shit, so shut the fuck up troll.

 

[PMZ]

Possibly. Wind and solar simply can't provide the kind of power we need to replace fossil fuels. And they're useless for transportation purposes.

I think that you are agreeing that it will probably or possibly take all the years left of our FF reserves to build a replacement system. Right?

Who knows? We have no way of knowing, really, how much remains in the ground.

I'm all for working on alternatives. Truly. But government has no business in the alternative business. Picking winners and losers based on political purity merely flushes tax dollars down the toilet with no return on investment. Look at Solyndra: Half a billion dollars gone, all to reward a Dem Party donor. The US taxpayers got screwed, and there's absolutely nothing to show for it.

Let the market do its job. Successful technologies WILL emerge -- guaranteed. Then they can be incorporated into the infrastructure, taking FF sources off-line as they're rendered redundant.

But it's nothing short of insanity to shut down FF sources before practical, scalable, and economical alternatives are in place. It's short-sighted and foolish, and will only harm the most vulnerable in society -- the poor and working poor.

If the government waits for business to welcome the future we'll be stuck here for ever. The future is risky. The present is profitable.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I just finished reading a post in which Abraham responded to a comment by posting a graph. After realizing the person he was talking to was taking visual cues from a picture and ignoring the information in the graph, I started thinking about why people deny climate change.

Tim Prosser wrote an interesting article on the subject and it came down to just a few ideas:

One is that many people who deny global warming do not have a science background. Therefore, they find themselves in a bind when dealing with the materials explaining the issue.

Additionally, climate change discussion has become so politicized and misinformation so regularly injected by those with incentive to do so that the conversation is overwhelming for many people to sort through.

And last but not least, I think the prospect of declining living standards creates an emotional response in people that in many ways shares the stages of grief. People are emotionally attached to lifestyles and it is VERY difficult to accept data that may point toward new behaviors.

K.

I deny climate change.
As I admire the mile thick ice covering Chicago today.

 

[westwall]

Do any of you denier sock puppets have anything that works better than this?

No? That's what I thought.

How about this?

Yeah, notice how it gets warm first and then the CO2 levels increase? No, I didn't think you would. Kills your little pet "theory" though.

 

[daveman]

Actually they are very good sources for transportation seeing as most driving gets done during the day. People don't realize the energy storage capacity of millions of electric cars.

Electric cars don't eliminate pollution; they merely relocate the source.

But have you seen an electric vehicle that can replace these?

Battery technology will have to improve by several orders of magnitude before these types of vehicles can run off electric motors.

And as far as electric passenger vehicles go, they're simply not practical yet, either. Limited range, too high a cost. A Chevy Volt is fine in the city -- out here in rural areas? Not so much.

Between then and now they'll run on CNG.

CNG has far less power than gasoline or diesel.

 

[westwall]

His graph would, too, if it weren't compressed to represent 300,000 years.

I do accept that for most of the Earth's history, increased CO2 has been a result of temperature increase rather than a cause. However, work last year by Jeremy Shakun (of Marcott and Shakun fame) showed that in many instances during the Holocene, increasing CO2 levels caused substantially MORE warming than the initial effect which triggered their own release. However, that was not the point.

During the 19th, 20th and 21st century, the correlation between CO2 level and global heat content has been exceptionally tight and through it all, CO2 levels have led.

The 300,000 year scale has nothing to do with any point I am trying to make. If you're interested, CO2 levels are now at values they have not reached in over 800,000 years.

Already discredited...do try and keep up.

 

[daveman]

The operative word is yet.

Indeed. Yet here, too, the government is trying to pick winners and losers.

And it's failing.

Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door.

Give taxpayer money to big party donors, and the taxpayers get screwed.

 

[Mr. H.]

And they think that big oil corporations and people like Donald Trump, do.

"Big Oil" is essentially non-existent in the U.S. It is the Independents that are the workhorses of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons within our nation. Independent as in non-integrated non-multinational concerns. Calm down, do your homework, and get a grip.

Tell that to Exxon Mobil. They won't agree.

Cock a leg, trollop.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think that you are agreeing that it will probably or possibly take all the years left of our FF reserves to build a replacement system. Right?

Who knows? We have no way of knowing, really, how much remains in the ground.

I'm all for working on alternatives. Truly. But government has no business in the alternative business. Picking winners and losers based on political purity merely flushes tax dollars down the toilet with no return on investment. Look at Solyndra: Half a billion dollars gone, all to reward a Dem Party donor. The US taxpayers got screwed, and there's absolutely nothing to show for it.

Let the market do its job. Successful technologies WILL emerge -- guaranteed. Then they can be incorporated into the infrastructure, taking FF sources off-line as they're rendered redundant.

But it's nothing short of insanity to shut down FF sources before practical, scalable, and economical alternatives are in place. It's short-sighted and foolish, and will only harm the most vulnerable in society -- the poor and working poor.

If the government waits for business to welcome the future we'll be stuck here for ever. The future is risky. The present is profitable.

Exactly!
That's why we never shifted from wood to coal.
From whale oil to petroleum.
From candles to kerosene.
From coal to natural gas.