Why do so many people deny climate change

[tinydancer]

E tu, IPCC? Then fall Warmers!

Komrades, Warmers, Progressives, lend me your Carbon Footprints. I come to bury the decline, not to hide it. The Warming that Carbon does is oft interred in the ocean

I see we have another couple of snotty pseudo scientists on the board. From what I have read they are the new watermelons.

(for those that might not know what a watermelon re: climate fanatics; the definition is
"green on the outside and commie red on the inside")

These two fit the bill it seems.

 

[PMZ]

I could care less what they wrote.

That this is the case doesn't surprise me. That you'd admit it in public does.

Real Climate and all the fraudsters have zero credibility based on the proven falsification of data they have been caught doing.

I'm afraid that's complete bullshit. The truth is that you're afraid of debating the facts of the matter - of putting McIntyre's "analysis" up against Marcott et al's explanations. You're afraid because you know you don't actually have the facts on your side. Marcott's statements regarding carbon isotope dating are verifiably correct. His statement's make sense. McIntyre's requires a cornucopia of dishonesty and a large scale conspiracy. Occam says go with Marcott and Shakun.



Are you accusing me of lying? If so, put it up here and prove it. Otherwise shove it up your ass and jump.



Again, whose puppet do you believe I am? I want some names. Is this something else you're actually afraid to get into? Maybe one day you'll learn to stop sticking your neck out like this.

Shakun et al has been proven false just like Mann's BS paper.

Show us some PROOF. Not just some other asshole badmouthing his betters. You said "proven". You're supposed to be a professor. You KNOW what that word means. Let's see it.

Unethical asshats like you and they don't care because scientific enquiry isn't your goal....political power and the theft of wealth is....

My goal is protecting the future in which my CHILDREN and THEIR CHILDREN and THEIR CHILDREN will have to live. I couldn't care less about wealth and power. I view you as a direct threat to their well being. You are threatening my children, you stupid asshole.

Most conservatives believe that if our children and theirs know no more than the average conservative knows, that's good enough. Education beyond theirs is a waste of money.

The ultimate Dunning-Kruger mindset.

 

[tinydancer]

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.

Considering meteorologists can't give an accurate 5 day forecast, why oh why would I believe that some scientist somewhere can predict a 50 year forecast?

I've already lived thru some of the most dire predictions by scientists that never came to fruition.

What did happen to that ice age? MMMMMM............let's see, the rain forest being cut down would mean the end of civilization as we know it..............that other one that Ted Danson was on about. I think it involved the death of the oceans and everything in it.

There have been so many.

And I'm still alive and kicking and bitching at my weatherman who still can't get it freaking right.

No doubt, you must be the smartest person in the world by far if nobody knows anything more or better than you.

At least that's one possibility.

Aren't you the little wanker? ! I never made that claim.

I simply answered the OP's question.

 

[westwall]

My question remains:
If more people AGREE on issues of reducing and preventing pollution,
conserving and restoring endangered wilderness and wildlife,
and that pursuing these ends would have the SAME EFFECT as
addressing environmental issues of conservation that "global warming" addresses

THEN WHY ARGUE ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING

Because they do not produce the same effect as directly addressing global warming. I fully support reducing and preventing pollution, conserving and restoring endangered wilderness and wildlife. Who doesn't? But that doesn't get us anywhere NEAR where we need to be. We need to move transportation and power generation away from fossil fuels. That's is THE most effective manner by which we can reduce our GHG emissions. Doing so will also dramatically reduce pollution and I am glad that is the case. But we need to directly address GHG emissions - not try to sneak it in with a green front.

Why not focus on similar or related points of AGREEMENT that solve the same problems?

Always a good idea when you can find such a situation.



No. Among climate scientists and the greater part of those with sufficient technical education to understand the issues at play, there is no conflict. This conflict, just like the conflict about evolution and the conflict about tobacco's link to lung cancer, is a complete and utter fraud.



If you think money is the root of this problem, why do you pay so little (if any) attention to the oil industry? From Wikipedia's article on it: "The production, distribution, refining, and retailing of petroleum taken as a whole represents the world's largest industry in terms of dollar value." The industry's current gross profits are $240 - $300 billion per year. Is that not enough to motivate folks to exceed their ethical limits?



Carbon credits weren't a sell out and they weren't intended to make money. Carbon credits are a paragon of capitalistic social engineering. The intention was to get business and industry to reduce their GHG emissions via the profit motive. It's no different than a tax, save that the tax collector is not with the government, he's another business that's done a better job than you at cleaning up his act. He didn't get to that position for free, though. He had to spend some money first to get into a position that he had credits to sell. And, of course, some folks will look for loopholes and shortcuts. And the statutory infrastructure was a whole new concept. So there were bound to be some rough patches as the system gets rolling and there will be people who successfully, but unethically, make some money off the system's weaknesses. Are there not people who do that with the US tax code, even today? Does that mean taxes don't work at funding the government? No. Carbon credits need work but they are still an excellent means of coercing the world's industries to clean up their acts.



Solyndra wasn't doing any environmental R&D. They had a very promising idea for a photovoltaics design. They looked to be a very successful player. But then the Chinese got into the picture and were able to make use of several technological innovations that, since they were starting from scratch, required no retooling. They took over the market. It wasn't just Solyndra. Several major US and European PV manufacturers went under at the same time.

3. whitewashing media and govt with PR $$$ from corporations such as BP
WITHOUT solving the problems as long as the right money exchanges with the right hands

I'm uncertain to what you refer here. The Deepwater Horizon spill?

could it be that THESE FACTORS have HURT the credibility of the REAL environmental preservationists and anti-pollution movements? And THAT BAD REPUTATION is why no one believes the global warming push?

If their reputation has been harmed - and I would include anti-warming activists in your clique and I do not disagree with you - it is a success on the part of a disinformation movement founded and funded by several segments of the fossil fuel industry and heartily befriended by a goodly part of the Republican party.

A "paragon"?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk]You keep using that word. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PMZ]

E tu, IPCC? Then fall Warmers!

Komrades, Warmers, Progressives, lend me your Carbon Footprints. I come to bury the decline, not to hide it. The Warming that Carbon does is oft interred in the ocean

I see we have another couple of snotty pseudo scientists on the board. From what I have read they are the new watermelons.

(for those that might not know what a watermelon re: climate fanatics; the definition is
"green on the outside and commie red on the inside")

These two fit the bill it seems.

The ultimate conservative monster in the closet.

The monster is old and proven toothless but still scares those who feel rather than think.

 

[westwall]

I could care less what they wrote.

That this is the case doesn't surprise me. That you'd admit it in public does.

Real Climate and all the fraudsters have zero credibility based on the proven falsification of data they have been caught doing.

I'm afraid that's complete bullshit. The truth is that you're afraid of debating the facts of the matter - of putting McIntyre's "analysis" up against Marcott et al's explanations. You're afraid because you know you don't actually have the facts on your side. Marcott's statements regarding carbon isotope dating are verifiably correct. His statement's make sense. McIntyre's requires a cornucopia of dishonesty and a large scale conspiracy. Occam says go with Marcott and Shakun.



Are you accusing me of lying? If so, put it up here and prove it. Otherwise shove it up your ass and jump.



Again, whose puppet do you believe I am? I want some names. Is this something else you're actually afraid to get into? Maybe one day you'll learn to stop sticking your neck out like this.

Shakun et al has been proven false just like Mann's BS paper.

Show us some PROOF. Not just some other asshole badmouthing his betters. You said "proven". You're supposed to be a professor. You KNOW what that word means. Let's see it.

Unethical asshats like you and they don't care because scientific enquiry isn't your goal....political power and the theft of wealth is....

My goal is protecting the future in which my CHILDREN and THEIR CHILDREN and THEIR CHILDREN will have to live. I couldn't care less about wealth and power. I view you as a direct threat to their well being. You are threatening my children, you stupid asshole.

Done repeatedly. Your inability to do a simple google search is duly noted.

 

[westwall]

You make it sound like there's a connection.

The warmers have proven their case, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Everyone believes them. That's why we voted to cripple our economy to reduce CO2.

Nobody ever said that science needs everyone to agree about anything. You have the world's permission to set new ignorance records if that's what floats your boat. The vast majority of science developed in the last few decades is absolutely beyond the average man on the street. Always will be. In fact the delta in terms of understanding between experts in every topic and the average person has been increasing for hundreds of years.

Anthropologists tell us that specialization is the foundation of civilization.

Conservatives will tell us that they are entitled to know everything without learning.

That's why civilization is leaving conservatism behind. It's old baggage.

What a loon! AGW proponents DEMAND THAT THERE BE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION YOU LYING PRICK!

 

[PMZ]

The warmers have proven their case, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Everyone believes them. That's why we voted to cripple our economy to reduce CO2.

Nobody ever said that science needs everyone to agree about anything. You have the world's permission to set new ignorance records if that's what floats your boat. The vast majority of science developed in the last few decades is absolutely beyond the average man on the street. Always will be. In fact the delta in terms of understanding between experts in every topic and the average person has been increasing for hundreds of years.

Anthropologists tell us that specialization is the foundation of civilization.

Conservatives will tell us that they are entitled to know everything without learning.

That's why civilization is leaving conservatism behind. It's old baggage.

What a loon! AGW proponents DEMAND THAT THERE BE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION YOU LYING PRICK!

You are welcome to discuss with others whatever you want to. Scientists the same.

However you have no credibility when addressing science as you have no education in science.

Simple concept. Perhaps you have your own expertise. Perhaps not. If you do it's because you invested in it.

You're looking for a free ride by having credibility without education.

That shit died centuries ago.

 

[tinydancer]

E tu, IPCC? Then fall Warmers!

Komrades, Warmers, Progressives, lend me your Carbon Footprints. I come to bury the decline, not to hide it. The Warming that Carbon does is oft interred in the ocean

I see we have another couple of snotty pseudo scientists on the board. From what I have read they are the new watermelons.

(for those that might not know what a watermelon re: climate fanatics; the definition is
"green on the outside and commie red on the inside")

These two fit the bill it seems.

The ultimate conservative monster in the closet.

The monster is old and proven toothless but still scares those who feel rather than think.

Science should lean neither left or right. There is no room for politics in the search for understanding and answers in the world of science.

You give yourself away with your political rhetoric. You have no love for science; you seek no truth.

You are an alarmist.

And alarmism has become the zealot's religion. Of that there is no doubt.

I just finished reading an excellent article by Dr. Richard Lindzen.

This quote from his essay captures the essence of the climate alarmism perfectly.

“Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly.

It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions.

How can one escape from the Iron Triangle when it produces flawed science that is immensely influential and is forcing catastrophic public policy?”

 

[PMZ]

I see we have another couple of snotty pseudo scientists on the board. From what I have read they are the new watermelons.

(for those that might not know what a watermelon re: climate fanatics; the definition is
"green on the outside and commie red on the inside")

These two fit the bill it seems.

The ultimate conservative monster in the closet.

The monster is old and proven toothless but still scares those who feel rather than think.

Science should lean neither left or right. There is no room for politics in the search for understanding and answers in the world of science.

You give yourself away with your political rhetoric. You have no love for science; you seek no truth.

You are an alarmist.

And alarmism has become the zealot's religion. Of that there is no doubt.

I just finished reading an excellent article by Dr. Richard Lindzen.

This quote from his essay captures the essence of the climate alarmism perfectly.

“Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly.

It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions.

How can one escape from the Iron Triangle when it produces flawed science that is immensely influential and is forcing catastrophic public policy?”

No matter how you try to portray it it ends up science vs politics. The world policy makers have decided to invest in science to guide their decision making. Good for them. Others are betting on ignorance. Let's do nothing and hope for the best. And let's do it by denying science. Let's do it by letting lying politicians duke it out.

There are no examples where acting out of ignorance bested acting from a position of knowledge.

 

[tinydancer]

Just an FYI for those interested.

Great review at Watts Up With That .

Climate Science Exploited for Political Agenda, According to Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
Posted on August 29, 2013 by Anthony Watts

TUCSON, Ariz., Aug. 28, 2013 — /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ – Climatism or global warming alarmism is the most prominent recent example of science being coopted to serve a political agenda, writes Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the in the fall 2013 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.

He compares it to past examples: Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union, and the eugenics movement.

Lindzen describes the Iron Triangle and the Iron Rice Bowl, in which ambiguous statements by scientists are translated into alarmist statements by media and advocacy groups, influencing politicians to feed more money to the acquiescent scientists.

In consequence, he writes, “A profound dumbing down of the discussion…interacts with the ascendancy of incompetents.” Prizes and accolades are awarded for politically correct statements, even if they defy logic.

“Unfortunately, this also often induces better scientists to join the pack in order to preserve their status,” Lindzen adds.

Climate Science Exploited for Political Agenda, According to Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons | Watts Up With That?

 

[PMZ]

Considering meteorologists can't give an accurate 5 day forecast, why oh why would I believe that some scientist somewhere can predict a 50 year forecast?

I've already lived thru some of the most dire predictions by scientists that never came to fruition.

What did happen to that ice age? MMMMMM............let's see, the rain forest being cut down would mean the end of civilization as we know it..............that other one that Ted Danson was on about. I think it involved the death of the oceans and everything in it.

There have been so many.

And I'm still alive and kicking and bitching at my weatherman who still can't get it freaking right.

No doubt, you must be the smartest person in the world by far if nobody knows anything more or better than you.

At least that's one possibility.

Aren't you the little wanker? ! I never made that claim.

I simply answered the OP's question.

Actually, you did. When you do it here you will get called on it.

 

[PMZ]

I could care less what they wrote.

That this is the case doesn't surprise me. That you'd admit it in public does.



I'm afraid that's complete bullshit. The truth is that you're afraid of debating the facts of the matter - of putting McIntyre's "analysis" up against Marcott et al's explanations. You're afraid because you know you don't actually have the facts on your side. Marcott's statements regarding carbon isotope dating are verifiably correct. His statement's make sense. McIntyre's requires a cornucopia of dishonesty and a large scale conspiracy. Occam says go with Marcott and Shakun.



Are you accusing me of lying? If so, put it up here and prove it. Otherwise shove it up your ass and jump.



Again, whose puppet do you believe I am? I want some names. Is this something else you're actually afraid to get into? Maybe one day you'll learn to stop sticking your neck out like this.



Show us some PROOF. Not just some other asshole badmouthing his betters. You said "proven". You're supposed to be a professor. You KNOW what that word means. Let's see it.

Unethical asshats like you and they don't care because scientific enquiry isn't your goal....political power and the theft of wealth is....

My goal is protecting the future in which my CHILDREN and THEIR CHILDREN and THEIR CHILDREN will have to live. I couldn't care less about wealth and power. I view you as a direct threat to their well being. You are threatening my children, you stupid asshole.

Done repeatedly. Your inability to do a simple google search is duly noted.

Perhaps there's a basis for this rant. Perhaps not. We'll never know because it's apparently a secret.

 

[PMZ]

The warmers have proven their case, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Everyone believes them. That's why we voted to cripple our economy to reduce CO2.

Nobody ever said that science needs everyone to agree about anything. You have the world's permission to set new ignorance records if that's what floats your boat. The vast majority of science developed in the last few decades is absolutely beyond the average man on the street. Always will be. In fact the delta in terms of understanding between experts in every topic and the average person has been increasing for hundreds of years.

Anthropologists tell us that specialization is the foundation of civilization.

Conservatives will tell us that they are entitled to know everything without learning.

That's why civilization is leaving conservatism behind. It's old baggage.

What a loon! AGW proponents DEMAND THAT THERE BE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION YOU LYING PRICK!

Strong, logical argument.

 

[tinydancer]

The ultimate conservative monster in the closet.

The monster is old and proven toothless but still scares those who feel rather than think.

Science should lean neither left or right. There is no room for politics in the search for understanding and answers in the world of science.

You give yourself away with your political rhetoric. You have no love for science; you seek no truth.

You are an alarmist.

And alarmism has become the zealot's religion. Of that there is no doubt.

I just finished reading an excellent article by Dr. Richard Lindzen.

This quote from his essay captures the essence of the climate alarmism perfectly.

“Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly.

It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions.

How can one escape from the Iron Triangle when it produces flawed science that is immensely influential and is forcing catastrophic public policy?”

No matter how you try to portray it it ends up science vs politics. The world policy makers have decided to invest in science to guide their decision making. Good for them. Others are betting on ignorance. Let's do nothing and hope for the best. And let's do it by denying science. Let's do it by letting lying politicians duke it out.

There are no examples where acting out of ignorance bested acting from a position of knowledge.

World policy makers and politicians have discovered a cash cow called climate science to bleed the populace of advanced nations dry all in the name of "saving the planet".

And to trust politicians to "save the planet" is sheer lunacy considering they can't fix a damn thing including fixing pot holes.



Sadly true environmental issues have fallen by the wayside because they just don't have the allure, the rock star power of climate alarmism.

Pity.

I've been a serious conservationist all my life, specifically water purity and preservation and I find this climate garbage aka AGW that has been foisted on the planet by the likes of Al Gore absolutely appalling.

 

[PMZ]

Science should lean neither left or right. There is no room for politics in the search for understanding and answers in the world of science.

You give yourself away with your political rhetoric. You have no love for science; you seek no truth.

You are an alarmist.

And alarmism has become the zealot's religion. Of that there is no doubt.

I just finished reading an excellent article by Dr. Richard Lindzen.

This quote from his essay captures the essence of the climate alarmism perfectly.

“Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly.

It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions.

How can one escape from the Iron Triangle when it produces flawed science that is immensely influential and is forcing catastrophic public policy?”

No matter how you try to portray it it ends up science vs politics. The world policy makers have decided to invest in science to guide their decision making. Good for them. Others are betting on ignorance. Let's do nothing and hope for the best. And let's do it by denying science. Let's do it by letting lying politicians duke it out.

There are no examples where acting out of ignorance bested acting from a position of knowledge.

World policy makers and politicians have discovered a cash cow called climate science to bleed the populace of advanced nations dry all in the name of "saving the planet".

And to trust politicians to "save the planet" is sheer lunacy considering they can't fix a damn thing including fixing pot holes.



Sadly true environmental issues have fallen by the wayside because they just don't have the allure, the rock star power of climate alarmism.

Pity.

I've been a serious conservationist all my life, specifically water purity and preservation and I find this climate garbage aka AGW that has been foisted on the planet by the likes of Al Gore absolutely appalling.

True environmentalists know that their power to change the world for the better comes from science and government.

If you believe that business believes anything but make more money regardless of the cost to others, you've been had.

 

[tinydancer]

No matter how you try to portray it it ends up science vs politics. The world policy makers have decided to invest in science to guide their decision making. Good for them. Others are betting on ignorance. Let's do nothing and hope for the best. And let's do it by denying science. Let's do it by letting lying politicians duke it out.

There are no examples where acting out of ignorance bested acting from a position of knowledge.

World policy makers and politicians have discovered a cash cow called climate science to bleed the populace of advanced nations dry all in the name of "saving the planet".

And to trust politicians to "save the planet" is sheer lunacy considering they can't fix a damn thing including fixing pot holes.



Sadly true environmental issues have fallen by the wayside because they just don't have the allure, the rock star power of climate alarmism.

Pity.

I've been a serious conservationist all my life, specifically water purity and preservation and I find this climate garbage aka AGW that has been foisted on the planet by the likes of Al Gore absolutely appalling.

True environmentalists know that their power to change the world for the better comes from science and government.

If you believe that business believes anything but make more money regardless of the cost to others, you've been had.

I'm a conservationist. Not an environmentalist.

I no longer trust scientists who have their hand in the cookie jar called "research funds" given by governments or large foundations who have agendas all their own.

There are far too many who fit that category these days. Sold their souls and bend for their masters.

 

[freedombecki]

No matter how you try to portray it it ends up science vs politics. The world policy makers have decided to invest in science to guide their decision making. Good for them. Others are betting on ignorance. Let's do nothing and hope for the best. And let's do it by denying science. Let's do it by letting lying politicians duke it out.

There are no examples where acting out of ignorance bested acting from a position of knowledge.

World policy makers and politicians have discovered a cash cow called climate science to bleed the populace of advanced nations dry all in the name of "saving the planet".

And to trust politicians to "save the planet" is sheer lunacy considering they can't fix a damn thing including fixing pot holes.



Sadly true environmental issues have fallen by the wayside because they just don't have the allure, the rock star power of climate alarmism.

Pity.

I've been a serious conservationist all my life, specifically water purity and preservation and I find this climate garbage aka AGW that has been foisted on the planet by the likes of Al Gore absolutely appalling.

True environmentalists know that their power to change the world for the better comes from science and government.

If you believe that business believes anything but make more money regardless of the cost to others, you've been had.

If you believe that business believes anything but make more money regardless of the cost to others, you've been had.

Al Gore earned $5,247 (some say $6,000 currently) per minute for his 2007 speech. An hour of Al Gore's environmental speech would cost you a minimum of $314,820 at his 2007 rate. (based on a British £ is equivalent to approximately $1.59 US Dollars currently.)Al Gore is criticised for lining his own pockets after £3,300-per-minute green speech | Mail Online

Educators in a number of countries refused free videos of his speech due to 9 inaccuracies (not cited in article), which is against educational principles universally, plus his use of exaggeration and omission is considered misleading by many scientists, not to mention honest journalists. Some of his work is accurate, but his use of political negativity against rivals was another reason cited by some countries' educational societies that would harm their children by poisoning the well of their minds in future decision-making.

Before accusing conservatives and conservationists of littering the landscape with discarded beer bottles, many of us have never done such a thing in our whole lives, and many of us turn off lights and fans when we leave a room and have done so for a lifetime.

Forcing societies to bankrupt their governments so unproved theories can be exercised can result in a lot of human misery. In my book, that is unnecessary, unwise, foolhardy.

So if profit is bad for conservatives, why are three thousand speeches by Al Gore that netted him half a billion dollars okay? Do tell.

Edit: Also, some of us are not amused that wind turbines kill millions of birds per year across the planet; because of them, the osprey count in the bird count surveys has declined as have other birds whose migratory paths fall where windfarms have arisen. Who speaks for them? The green community is mute on death by windfarm for birds and death by tidal turbines on aquatic mammals and fish and other sea species.

 

[SSDD]

Live by the sword. Die by the sword. Abraham and PMZ's slavish devotion to the IPCC means they will go down with the ship when they IPCC is finally laughed off the world stage.

That day is coming fast. Some warmers are saying that this latest IPCC release will be the death knell for the IPCC itself. No credibility left.

I think that history will judge the IPCC as the leading cause of the death of the conservative movement.

It is obvious by now that you don't think at all. You believe and in turn act on faith.

 

[SSDD]

If you believe that business believes anything but make more money regardless of the cost to others, you've been had.

The fact that you are here 24/7 makes it obvious that you don't work. You are either an unemployed loser or a kid still living with your parents....so what the hell would you know about business?