Are Climate Change Deniers Immoral?

[Liminal]

What is the moral basis for climate change denial? Do climate change deniers have any morality? Based on the evidence of global climate change, and the obvious effects this will have on humanity, are climate change deniers in fact immoral?
Climate denial is immoral says head of US Episcopal church Environment The Guardian

 

[Luddly Neddite]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is the moral basis for climate change denial? Do climate change deniers have any morality? Based on the evidence of global climate change, and the obvious effects this will have on humanity, are climate change deniers in fact immoral?
Climate denial is immoral says head of US Episcopal church Environment The Guardian

What is the moral basis for climate change denial?

The climate should never, ever change.
Because the current climate is perfect.
How many trillions should we spend to keep climate the same, forever?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Denier is an AGWCult secret handshake word.

No real scientist ever called a skeptic a "denier" nor did they ever claim science ended because they had "consensus"

 

[Liminal]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

"The land that the Lord your God cares for. The eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."
Deuteronomy 11:12

 

[mamooth]

I don't believe that rank-and-file deniers will be able to use their ignorance as an excuse for they harm they cause. A drunk driver may sincerely believe he's not doing harm, but we still define drunk drivers as immoral. Those low-level deniers are like drunk drivers with the truth.

Taken past a certain point, deliberate incompetence crosses the line into immorality. Deniers have been presented with all the tools and information they need to not be incompetent, but they still deliberately choose to be incompetent. Hence, they are morally culpable for the harm that derives from their incompetence.

 

[Freewill]

I don't believe that rank-and-file deniers will be able to use their ignorance as an excuse for they harm they cause. A drunk driver may sincerely believe he's not doing harm, but we still define drunk drivers as immoral. Those low-level deniers are like drunk drivers with the truth.

Taken past a certain point, deliberate incompetence crosses the line into immorality. Deniers have been presented with all the tools and information they need to not be incompetent, but they still deliberately choose to be incompetent. Hence, they are morally culpable for the harm that derives from their incompetence.

Let's use the analogy to its completion. Let's say, instead of climate change, the deniers were denying the holocaust and you knew all along it is going on. The question isn't what the deniers will do but what YOU are doing. Would you confront the Nazis or would you confront those who denied the holocaust?

In other words, what are you doing to stop what you apparently feel I can stop. Cut back on your driving? Internet use? Paid for carbon credits? What exactly is it that you are doing other then calling people names? Which the consensus of scientist has agreed that name calling leads to global warming.

 

[Freewill]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

"The land that the Lord your God cares for. The eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."
Deuteronomy 11:12

God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

God pretty much is saying, do as you want it is yours.

 

[Liminal]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

"The land that the Lord your God cares for. The eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."
Deuteronomy 11:12

God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

God pretty much is saying, do as you want it is yours.

That would be the immoral interpretation. The moral interpretation is that God has made us responsible to take care of his creations.

 

[mamooth]

Let's use the analogy to its completion. Let's say, instead of climate change, the deniers were denying the holocaust and you knew all along it is going on. The question isn't what the deniers will do but what YOU are doing. Would you confront the Nazis or would you confront those who denied the holocaust?

We'd confront them both. Just as we confront both the denier leaders and the denier rank-and-file.

In other words, what are you doing to stop what you apparently feel I can stop. Cut back on your driving? Internet use? Paid for carbon credits?

Yes.

And that's all the response that fallacy deserves.

What exactly is it that you are doing other then calling people names?

Trying to keep the Nazis, as your analogy puts it, out of positions of power.

Which the consensus of scientist has agreed that name calling leads to global warming.

It's a consensus that's it's not very brave to avoid the actual issue by pretending it's just name calling.

 

[PredFan]

What is the moral basis for climate change denial? Do climate change deniers have any morality? Based on the evidence of global climate change, and the obvious effects this will have on humanity, are climate change deniers in fact immoral?
Climate denial is immoral says head of US Episcopal church Environment The Guardian

There is no moral basis for AGW denial, and there need not be. Likewise, there is no moral basis for AGW belief, and there need not be.

AGW Deniers have a great deal of morality. It can be effectively argued that we do whereas believers don't.

No one denies the evidence of climate change. We all know that climate changes.

 

[Staidhup]

Climate change deniers immoral? You have got to be nuts, you didn't really mean to imply that did you? The only immoral aspect is that interpretation and intent by the scientific community to associate climate change with the advancement of the human species. This is synonymous with stating scientifically that climate remains constant, however within a living organism, which is what the world is, change is natural, healthy, and essential in the preservation of the organism. The race of man has existed on this planet for a minuscule fraction of the earths existence and to think we are some how supreme over nature is pure baloney. The earth has the capacity to heal itself and will do so regardless of whether man exists or not. Furthermore the immoral comment should be applied to all those that profess that if we adopted their viewpoint and did as they demanded that it would miraculously make a difference, which it will not and is nothing more than hypothetical nonsense. But then again those that own carbon sequestration banks and are involved in selling carbon neutral products have a very large financial stake and incentive to sell this snake oil.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I joined USMB on Dec. 1, 2014. I hereby nominate this thread as the dumbest, stupidest, blockheaded, densest, doltish, numbskulled post I have PASSED ON reading after wasting my time on the lead post, since I became a member.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% Accurate.

We have Consensus!

Consensus, another word you don't understand. Try the dictionary.

DENIER!!!!!

Are we going to be reviewing all the words you don't understand? This could take a long time.

CONSENSUS DENIER!!!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

"The land that the Lord your God cares for. The eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."
Deuteronomy 11:12

How odd to use the excuse of an imaginary, invisible being to destroy what one believes that imaginary being created.

 

[PredFan]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

"The land that the Lord your God cares for. The eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."
Deuteronomy 11:12

How odd to use the excuse of an imaginary, invisible being to destroy what one believes that imaginary being created.

In order for that to be the case, the left wing lies about AGW would have to be true. They aren't so there's no conflict.

 

[Liminal]

YES.

Not the dumb RWs. They're just doing what they're told, following orders from their owners.

But, the businesses who rape the planet for money, knowing they are dooming their own children and grandchildren to a life of misery - that's immoral.

"The land that the Lord your God cares for. The eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."
Deuteronomy 11:12

How odd to use the excuse of an imaginary, invisible being to destroy what one believes that imaginary being created.

In order for that to be the case, the left wing lies about AGW would have to be true. They aren't so there's no conflict.

Climate change deniers whole premise is a lie. In order for the deniers to have any moral or ethical credibility they would have to stop lying about everything all the time. They won't, so they are in fact immoral. Their position is based on deception, innuendo, distortion, and outright lies.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I don't know of any climate change deniers. Most people agree that the climate changes cyclically and nothing can be done about it. No denial of anything necessary.
There is a morality problem with global warming alarmists, however. Their political ambition causes economic problems for much of the world through unnecessarily overpriced energy and the hardships that creates are their doing.
Most of those who clamor the loudest about the bogus AGW agenda are wealthy enough and insulated enough to be unfazed but their agenda hurts many others.

 

[SillyWabbit]

I don't believe that rank-and-file deniers will be able to use their ignorance as an excuse for they harm they cause. A drunk driver may sincerely believe he's not doing harm, but we still define drunk drivers as immoral. Those low-level deniers are like drunk drivers with the truth.

Taken past a certain point, deliberate incompetence crosses the line into immorality. Deniers have been presented with all the tools and information they need to not be incompetent, but they still deliberately choose to be incompetent. Hence, they are morally culpable for the harm that derives from their incompetence.

The last I heard, human beings live on earth. This includes me, you, everyone. If one of us is culpable, all of us are culpable. I don't see too many people running to the hills to live off the land and escape all this so-called immoral behavior we're all engaged in.
All you folks tripping on whatever is supposedly going on with our environment better not think you're above the fray: You're down here wallowing in it just like everyone else.
You wouldn't be reading this if you weren't.
Thanks for coming. Now, let's all go get pizza and beer!

 

[Porker]

I don't believe that rank-and-file deniers will be able to use their ignorance as an excuse for they harm they cause. A drunk driver may sincerely believe he's not doing harm, but we still define drunk drivers as immoral. Those low-level deniers are like drunk drivers with the truth.

Taken past a certain point, deliberate incompetence crosses the line into immorality. Deniers have been presented with all the tools and information they need to not be incompetent, but they still deliberately choose to be incompetent. Hence, they are morally culpable for the harm that derives from their incompetence.

The last I heard, human beings live on earth. This includes me, you, everyone. If one of us is culpable, all of us are culpable. I don't see too many people running to the hills to live off the land and escape all this so-called immoral behavior we're all engaged in.
All you folks tripping on whatever is supposedly going on with our environment better not think you're above the fray: You're down here wallowing in it just like everyone else.
You wouldn't be reading this if you weren't.
Thanks for coming. Now, let's all go get pizza and beer!

Just don't start farting from all the pizza and beer. That's what causes all the immorality for not believing in goreable warming.

 

[orogenicman]

I don't believe that rank-and-file deniers will be able to use their ignorance as an excuse for they harm they cause. A drunk driver may sincerely believe he's not doing harm, but we still define drunk drivers as immoral. Those low-level deniers are like drunk drivers with the truth.

Taken past a certain point, deliberate incompetence crosses the line into immorality. Deniers have been presented with all the tools and information they need to not be incompetent, but they still deliberately choose to be incompetent. Hence, they are morally culpable for the harm that derives from their incompetence.

Let's use the analogy to its completion. Let's say, instead of climate change, the deniers were denying the holocaust and you knew all along it is going on. The question isn't what the deniers will do but what YOU are doing. Would you confront the Nazis or would you confront those who denied the holocaust?

In other words, what are you doing to stop what you apparently feel I can stop. Cut back on your driving? Internet use? Paid for carbon credits? What exactly is it that you are doing other then calling people names? Which the consensus of scientist has agreed that name calling leads to global warming.

Global warming is a global issue, and requires a global response. Everyone must do their part.