Climate change denial

originally posted by: ABNARTY
a reply to: Skorpiogurl

Could not these same conditions support acceptance of AGW as the sole catalyst for climate change?

2nd

Well yeah, global warming is a form of climate change. I think scientists stopped referring to global warming and began to use climate change in its place around 1995. I am not sure why.

one more should be at the top of the list.....roofing material.....roofs could be.....white in color

originally posted by: Stupidsecrets
Many things could be done right now for the environment. The "Evangelistic Climatist" law makers however like AOC, Bernie and Warren never submit any bills that have a chance of passing.

They are also not scientists. Somehow though, they know everything there is to know about a complex issue. It would be like following the instructions of a shade tree car mechanic on how to land the next rover on Mars. The result will be a total disaster.

Some things though could be done right now. For one, get rid of residential recycling programs. It waste way more money and resources than it preserves. If you don't believe that, go read Rachel Maddow's thoughts on it. She worked in the industry and says it's a scam but it's not that hard to figure out why. It would be better to pay the homeless to make trash art so they can buy drugs instead of recycling and I'm not kidding.

Another easy fix; get rid of junk mail or charge them double to send it. DON'T give them a discount. This will save a massive amount of trees, landfill space, and energy.

These are simple fixes but no, we can't do these things. We have to waste more money on other failed programs which, IMO, is really all climate change is at this point; another way to re-distribute wealth or steal money from others.

a reply to: MoonMine

Agree! The thing that bugs me is that people will use the statistics we have on temperature etc for the past hundred years or so or readings based on some ice samples from several thousand years ago. That is a blink of an eye in the total amount of time the earth has been around. There is no way for us to know that if this change is in tune with what has gone on in the past. The earth has changed a great deal in just the last few thousand years let alone millions, it is cyclical and is hugely dependent on what is going on in the universe which we have no control over

Look at all the natural disasters that have happened before humans were evolved to what we are now and the earth has survived if not thrived. Several volcanoes erupting are going to do much more damage than a herd of cows farting and we cannot control volcanoes at this point as one example


There is no doubt that the climate has changed but I feel the emphasis on the human cause of that is highly over rated and has nefarious beginnings. While I agree to being better stewards of the earth and doing what we can to limit pollution etc, it is difficult for me to believe that humans will cause the earth to die based on what it has already been through. It will be the other way around barring some huge disaster where the earth is eliminated by an asteroid or our sun explodes and vaporizes us all.

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

I'm a shining example of someone who thinks about what I see and what I've read. Contrary to what you may think, I read a lot and from all sides.

I've never heard any of the climate change advocates adequately explain anything about how any of their so-called solutions will actually "fix" their problem. I have seen them make failed doom prediction after failed doom prediction though.

I've also followed my local meteorologists who are real stat heads and compare what's going on today against their own weather records going back clear to the 1800s. Did you know that the year we had here was one of the coolest going back to 1800s? It was a top 25 coolest year on average even though we did have a month or two in there that were in the average top 25 warmest.

My conclusion after watching them track wettest, driest, warmest, coolest, record low highs, and record high lows, etc., is that weather does all kinds of things, but in the main, it's not wildly outside the norm for where I am. There is no general long term trend that I can see either warmer or cooler, and while it may look like it's headed that way for a while, it pretty quickly heads back the way it came given enough time.

originally posted by: Skorpiogurl
First, denial is a response to something we fear, and we know from animal and human studies that fear induces freezing and passivity. But studies also demonstrate that giving a fearful animal or human a task that even symbolically addresses what is feared can minimize freezing and promote action. Thus, recommending tasks that we can perform in our daily lives may help us overcome our feeling that mitigating climate change is a hopeless enterprise and motivate us join the voices insisting on ending burning fossil fuels.

Read this back to yourself until you realise maybe you're the one in denial, freezing with fear, inhibiting your ability to identify bias.

In a world of misinformation, why are the oil companies the only "bad guys"?

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

OK. Climate change then.

Could not these same conditions support acceptance of anthropomorphic catalyst as the sole factor in climate change?

originally posted by: watchitburn
Lots of straw man arguments, and no facts.

I haven't seen anyone deny that the climate is, does and will continue to change. But stick to your talking points and buzz words.

And keep ignoring that fact that none of the proposed "fixes" for climate change even address how they will work.

Ignore the countless instances of manipulated and falsified data used to prop up the arguments you base your feels on.

Ignore that it has been much hotter with more co2 several times over the earth's history,

I gnore that humans had nothing to do with the climate changing then.

Right-O! I already said I have no facts or scientific data. It was about three maybe four responses ago. It's just and idea that I find interesting. It's also interesting how many responses actually reflect exactly what the OP intends.

I also stated that despite facts or lack thereof, I know what I see and it just isn't right. That's for me personally - and is not up for debate lest someone want's to tell me how I feel. That would be just plan bull#

I didn't intend this to be based on facts. Just interesting content.

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

Probably because on average the globe wasn't warming.

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

dont forget the opposite of the OP: Gullible

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

Very well, what isn't right?

What is your definition of right?

Are you comparing what you're seeing now to something previous?

originally posted by: Tropics

originally posted by: Skorpiogurl
First, denial is a response to something we fear, and we know from animal and human studies that fear induces freezing and passivity. But studies also demonstrate that giving a fearful animal or human a task that even symbolically addresses what is feared can minimize freezing and promote action. Thus, recommending tasks that we can perform in our daily lives may help us overcome our feeling that mitigating climate change is a hopeless enterprise and motivate us join the voices insisting on ending burning fossil fuels.

Read this back to yourself until you realise maybe you're the one in denial, freezing with fear, inhibiting your ability to identify bias.

In a world of misinformation, why are the oil companies the only "bad guys"?

They are not the only bad guys
I am not in denial, I know what I see. I am not freezing with fear. If it all comes crumbling down so be it.
It is only stating the idea of facing ones fears.

a reply to: Skorpiogurl


Ummm...

Climate change denial

True believers always attempt to pigeon hole the unbeliever with the use of catchphrases...

Labeling...is the method most used in an attempt to gain some imagined moral high ground over the non believer...

the refusal to accept the reality of climate change

Everybody accepts the reality of climate change...just not...YOUR...particular reality...

"I reject your version of reality...and substitute my own"

I'm just not a follower of your particular...ahem...faith...














YouSir

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Skorpiogurl

Probably because on average the globe wasn't warming.

As long as you are referring to the past and not the present...

Climate change does mean that there is more energy stored inside Earths athmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and anthroposphere. Which leads to more extreme weather expressions. Too hot, too cold, too wet, too dry. All based on too much energy stored.

originally posted by: ABNARTY
a reply to: Skorpiogurl

OK. Climate change then.

Could not these same conditions support acceptance of anthropomorphic catalyst as the sole factor in climate change?

I believe that if one accepts climate change for we are told it is, we also have to accept an anthropomorphic catalyst as at least part factor. Not the sole factor.

I have never seen a movement where the frontline leaders are leading not only from the rear, but the farthest they can get away from the battlefield. Their carbon footprints are 1,000's of times larger than the average person.

It would be nice for once if during a debate, a moderator would show Bernie, with scientific data, why his owning of 3 properties for two people is not helping the situation at all.

originally posted by: YouSir
a reply to: Skorpiogurl


Ummm...

Climate change denial

True believers always attempt to pigeon hole the unbeliever with the use of catchphrases...

Labeling...is the method most used in an attempt to gain some imagined moral high ground over the non believer...

the refusal to accept the reality of climate change

Everybody accepts the reality of climate change...just not...YOUR...particular reality...

"I reject your version of reality...and substitute my own"

I'm just not a follower of your particular...ahem...faith...

YouSir

Fair enough.

No where did I state or even ask anyone to accept my reality in fact, good Sir, I don't believe anyone here knows the color of my reality. Wait, are we related or something? No, just a joke But I do have a question for you, why the "Ahem" before the word faith? Do you have any? in anything? Sometimes I feel very sad, it does not seem like many people have faith in or even cherish anything anymore. We live in such a disposable world. That is another topic though.

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

OK. I agree.

I have to think there is at least some input from human activity. However, the climate is dynamic. It has always has been in a state of flux from various factors.

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

The man-made climate change scheme is an appeal to emotions. The promoters play on the fears of the uninformed in order to gain more power, control, and money.

It isn't so much about controlling or changing the climate as it is about enacting an economic change.

Something most people won't voluntarily do, but if they are frightened into doing it, then the ability to enforce draconian changes are that much easier.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

"Too much energy stored" ...

It all comes back to that evil sun doesn't it?

Bernie Sanders is a climate change denier. He denies owning 3 homes for two people is somehow having no impact on anything. Same goes for the rest of them. They are the real deniers.