Maybe the critics just need to see a therapist

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   
www.buzzflash.com...

The anxiety and conflicting reports of global warming may be too much for many people. It is indeed hard to change personal habits, but it takes only two weeks to break a bad habit.

If the threat appears to be long-term and/or unmanageable, only the most capable individuals can manage the emotional distress. More anxious individuals will resort to reactive thinking for reassurance and anxiety control. A recent study found that conservatives tend to be more anxious and less able tolerate conflicting facts and ambiguity, than are liberals. Greater anxiety makes reactive thinking and outright denial of dangers more likely.




posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by accountability
www.buzzflash.com...

The anxiety and conflicting reports of global warming may be too much for many people. It is indeed hard to change personal habits, but it takes only two weeks to break a bad habit.


Tell that to people who have quit smoking for a month only to pick it back up again
For me at least it is most definitely more a habit than an addiction. (For what it's worth, I'm not denying that its an addiction at all. From my attempts at trying to quit, the hardest part for me is getting past the associative things--a smoke with coffee, a smoke while driving, etc. I've been through the withdrawal symptoms a couple of times, and actually find them quite fun...)



If the threat appears to be long-term and/or unmanageable, only the most capable individuals can manage the emotional distress. More anxious individuals will resort to reactive thinking for reassurance and anxiety control. A recent study found that conservatives tend to be more anxious and less able tolerate conflicting facts and ambiguity, than are liberals. Greater anxiety makes reactive thinking and outright denial of dangers more likely.


I hate statements like this and those the link provided. There's no way to argue with them without feeling like you're proving them right in some way. If I sit here and say that the environmental fear-mongers are blowing everything out of proportion, then I just can't handle the truth. This is actually a very good strategy for getting people to believe what you tell them, and it's used in everything from debunking UFOs to Religion to virtually any other conspiracy that has been analyzed on both sides.

Personally, I think there is a lot of problems with how people treat the environment. I think there's a lot of things that should be changed. But at the same time I don't necessarily believe that we're on the verge of a catastrophic climate change anytime soon because someone uses too much hairspray or drives an SUV. I don't think that the ice caps are melting any more than other ice sheets are growing. I think that a lot of environmental research doesn't look at other factors that contradict or nullify some of the findings. People like to be scared, people like to think "the End is nigh". People will jump on any bandwagon that talks about armeggedon because they like the chill they get. I'm the same way--start talking about potential of an asteroid hitting or an alien invasion and I'm glued to it. Just my opinion though.



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
That's pretty much the standard liberal diatribe, isn't it? Can't win the argument on facts and logic (because facts, logic, and sound science do not support environmental doomsdayism) so they resort to personal attacks and insults.



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave_54
That's pretty much the standard liberal diatribe, isn't it? ... so they resort to personal attacks and insults.


So why do you stoop to that level yourself then? Is it because you can't win the argument on facts and logic?

Feel free to discuss and analyse the study on its merits with some real insights.

If this just turns into a left v. right slugfest it will be trashed.

This is Fragile Earth not PTS.
.



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Where was the therapist during Bush's re-election (wink)?

I know of many who go around babling incoherent stuff all the time since that fateful day.

I for one can be heard saying "Mommy"!! in the middle of the night....


By the by i dont think this belongs on fragile earth, IMHO

[edit on 26-4-2005 by dgtempe]



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   
I posted this to help people who feel alarmed, concerned, or afraid of news stories related to the global warming, ozone destroying, climate changing, and other 'environment' wacko conspiracies. Fragile Earth has enough problems, and this 'study' is related to how mass psychology handles 'bad' news. I also posted this to help the people who need to question their 'emotional' reaction to 'bad' news. I believe the study has relevance to how to question your sources, investigate facts, and keep an open mind.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   
I can see why people dont want to see that we are wrecking the environment... our lifetimes wont see any significant changes, and maybe the next wont either... a degree or two rise in temperature in 50-75 years isnt too much... so why should we stop doing the things we want to do, let the future generations deal with it...

But that attitude is wrong, if we can be doing anything at all to be better by the environment we should be doing it... The problem with todays society is that money comes first then everything else comes after that... so if improving the environment is going to cost more than #ing it up... we'll just keep #ing it up...

Its sad.





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join