Are Climate Change Deniers Immoral?

[Porker]

The entire subject matter of gorebal warming is false, lying and immoral.

 

[AVG-JOE]

If humans could have caused all the shit on this earth that happened naturally like...

The Grand Canyon

The Rocky Mountain Range

The Alps

The Himalayas

The Oceans

The Great Lakes

Bryce Canyon

Death Valley

The Appalachians

The Ozarks

The Smokies

Yellowstone

The Great Yellowstone Caldera, just to name a few...

Then I would buy the global warming bullshit...But we couldn't have even imagined all that much less cause it to happen.

Do you understand why the government made the oil industry spend the money required to produce their product without lead?

Do you understand that carbon dioxide is an invisible gas and that human activity has been pumping billions of tons of the stuff in to the atmosphere every year since the industrial revolution?

If you can watch 'Cosmos' and continue to deny that the human industry of the last hundred years is way different in the way it affects the planetary environment than the human agriculture of the last 10,000 years, we'll have to agree to disagree.

If carbon dioxide was purple instead of clear, this argument would have ended in the 1970's

 

[Yarddog]

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

Absolutely not. Anyone who expresses a doubt, or questions part of what is man made vs natural cycle is called a denier. First it will be called immoral , then it will become hate, people will be punished for thought that is counter to the brainwashed mainstream, i always thought in th epast that liberals were supposed to be the open minded ones, but not this particular strain.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I simply don't understand how anyone can look at the evidence of carbon dioxide measurements taken over the years and not see the connection.

I'm also baffled a lack of concern over pollution in general... whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is fucking with the climate notwithstanding... less pollution would be a good thing, no?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I simply don't understand how anyone can look at the evidence of carbon dioxide measurements taken over the years and not see the connection.

I'm also baffled a lack of concern over pollution in general... whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is fucking with the climate notwithstanding... less pollution would be a good thing, no?

Rand Paul is trying to get people to believe that it is Republicans who care about keeping the earth clean. He called up Teddy Roosevelt.

If only he had some way to bring about a reduction in pollution that had more teeth than a friendly request.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If humans could have caused all the shit on this earth that happened naturally like...

The Grand Canyon

The Rocky Mountain Range

The Alps

The Himalayas

The Oceans

The Great Lakes

Bryce Canyon

Death Valley

The Appalachians

The Ozarks

The Smokies

Yellowstone

The Great Yellowstone Caldera, just to name a few...

Then I would buy the global warming bullshit...But we couldn't have even imagined all that much less cause it to happen.

Do you understand why the government made the oil industry spend the money required to produce their product without lead?

Do you understand that carbon dioxide is an invisible gas and that human activity has been pumping billions of tons of the stuff in to the atmosphere every year since the industrial revolution?

If you can watch 'Cosmos' and continue to deny that the human industry of the last hundred years is way different in the way it affects the planetary environment than the human agriculture of the last 10,000 years, we'll have to agree to disagree.

If carbon dioxide was purple instead of clear, this argument would have ended in the 1970's

How much do we have to reduce CO2 to get ISIS out of the middle East.

Also, you say billions of tons like that's supposed to be a large number compared to the mass of earths atmosphere.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I simply don't understand how anyone can look at the evidence of carbon dioxide measurements taken over the years and not see the connection.

I'm also baffled a lack of concern over pollution in general... whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is fucking with the climate notwithstanding... less pollution would be a good thing, no?

I simply don't understand how anyone can look at the evidence of carbon dioxide measurements taken over the years and not see the connection.

We burn hydrocarbons, CO2 levels rise. So do living standards and life spans.

I'm also baffled a lack of concern over pollution in general

The environment has gotten cleaner over the last few decades in the US.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I simply don't understand how anyone can look at the evidence of carbon dioxide measurements taken over the years and not see the connection.

I'm also baffled a lack of concern over pollution in general... whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is fucking with the climate notwithstanding... less pollution would be a good thing, no?

There's been no warming for 2 decades. How do you explain that?

 

[Muhammed]

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

Who said that the climate doesn't change?

 

[Muhammed]

As if killing Rhinos for their horns or elephants for their tusks ISN'T interfering with nature?

Is it supernatural?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I don't understand why people accept a "theory" with no evidence, no experiments, altered data and no warming in 2 decades

How does that work

 

[orogenicman]

As if killing Rhinos for their horns or elephants for their tusks ISN'T interfering with nature?

Is it supernatural?

Erm, what?

 

[Votto]

I don't understand why people accept a "theory" with no evidence, no experiments, altered data and no warming in 2 decades

How does that work

It's simple. Create a thing called the Chicago Climate Exchange and pass cap and trade and watch people become wealthy beyond their wildest dreams as they rake in trillions.

All that is needed is to dupe the masses into thinking you are trying to save the planet.

Politics never changes.

 

[Muhammed]

I don't understand why people accept a "theory" with no evidence, no experiments, altered data and no warming in 2 decades

How does that work

Faith. It's a doomsday cult.

 

[Manonthestreet]

I simply don't understand how anyone can look at the evidence of carbon dioxide measurements taken over the years and not see the connection.

I'm also baffled a lack of concern over pollution in general... whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is fucking with the climate notwithstanding... less pollution would be a good thing, no?

We have less pollution........next

 

[westwall]

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

The second you bring morals into an argument, you have left science at the door. Science is about facts. Truth and morals is the realm of religion.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Are Climate Change Deniers Immoral?"

No, they're just dishonest and wrong.

Their opposition to the science is predicated on ignorance, unwarranted fear, and errant rightwing partisan politics.

 

[DarkFury]

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

The second you bring morals into an argument, you have left science at the door. Science is about facts. Truth and morals is the realm of religion.

I disagree with you on morals. ANY group can set morals like the boy scouts or even a family. On the other hand ethics is NOT science yet IS playing a role in this phony global warming scam.

So to invoke ethics of honesty in data or research only can improve the results of the research. THIS has been the problem with their argument from the start. The ethics in their science have shown to be bought for grant money or outcome.

Science NEEDS to be free of politics free of agendas to be useful.

 

[quorthon]

Who said that the climate doesn't change?

Republican leaders and all the Republican Internet spammers.

It's not about morality, it's about political ideology, political faith. And in this case the Republican party is God and all the words about climate change denial are words of God.

 

[PredFan]

"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.

So, I said that the believers were lying and you respond with "The Deniers are lying more?" That's it? Schoolyard gainsaying is all you have? Grow up.

Another false, lying, immoral interpretation.

Now you are just boring me.