It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Climate 'denial' is now a mental disorder

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Good find budski.


This is insane. And I refuse to go back and get a new Psychology degree. My old one is probably much safer then what these whackadoos are pushing nowadays.




posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
The problem is that we have manipulation of evidence by the very same people who run this show.

We have no weighting because of the urban heat island effect, we have monitoring stations placed where "hotspots" (vents, car parks etc ) exist, we have monitoring stations closed in the coldest parts of the world and then we have them shouting down anyone who wants a reasoned debate and using smear tactics against them.

Our first concern should not be lining the pockets of people like gore.

Our priority should be fixing the parts of our environment that can be fixed.

In ther words, stop cutting down rainforests, stop dumping toxic waste, start looking after the little things, and the big things will take care of themselves.

If there's a problem (and that's a very big IF) then all arguments should be heard - not just the arguments that it suits the diehard AGW proponents to hear.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
You all know perfectly well that the reason for defining human caused climate change as a fact is that it makes it subject to penalties. It's about MONEY as always. Cap and trade. big money for governments. big money for traders. big money for all sorts of people EXCEPT the regular people who get to pay all this money to be paid by those polluting on their behalf. Or maybe I should say "polluting" because there is surely a specific definition. I certainly think we should stop polluting, but I don't think making money off polution is an acceptable industry to create. Counterproductive, if you know what I mean.

It's a new twist on growing money on trees. It's making money on air.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ergoli
 


What a funny way to describe climate change deniers.. Just because they don't agree with the consensus they must be uber-conservative and mental.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
reply to post by ergoli
 


What a funny way to describe climate change deniers.. Just because they don't agree with the consensus they must be uber-conservative and mental.


didn't you know that?


It;s a really bad way to describe anyone with a differing point of view, my fear is that if it becomes way too prevalent a way of thinking we may start viewing anyone with a dissenting opinion as "mentally disturbed"



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


When actually, I'm more left leaning with a high regard for personal freedom and other "liberal" views.



That's the problem with attempting to tar a group of people with the same brush - the preconceptions are invariably misconceptions.

vkey08
Why not - it worked in the USSR for many years, particularly under Stalin.

I feel the irony may be lost on some though




[edit on 9/3/2009 by budski]



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Climate denial is a mental disorder? Whats next are they going to burn us at the stake for explaining that the weather goes in natural cycles and this climate always changes?


I think we better quiet up and be cautious about how much common sense we try to explain to the extreme disillusioned environmentalists.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


The Irony wasn't lost

And who knows we could all be so ill that the only "normal" one is Al Gore... now that would be scary.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski

Meanwhile at the University of the West of England in Bristol this weekend, a conference of "eco-psychologists", led by a professor, are solemnly exploring the notion that "climate change denial" should be classified as a form of "mental disorder".
(visit the link for the full news article)


Yeah, yeah. Where is the evidence that this is the case?

Chris Brooker, a well-known denier - a group not known for intellectual honesty - says that's what the conference is about. What is it really about?


Programme:
09.00 - 09.30 Registration and coffee
09.30 - 09.45 Chair’s opening comments
09.45 - 10.15 George Marshall –
Sleepwalking into Disaster –
Strategies of Evasion and Denial in
Social Attitudes to Climate Change
10.15 - 11.15 Paul Hoggett -
The Politics and Emotions of
Climate Change Denial
10.15 - 11.45 Break
11.45 - 13.00 Mary-Jayne Rust –
The Myths By Which We Live - Or
Die? The Psychological Dimensions
of Our Environmental Crisis
13.00 - 14.15 Lunch
14.15 - 15.30 Themed groups
Zita Cox – Environmental Constellation;
Nick Totton – Embodying Ecopsychology;
Dr Chris Johnstone - The Psychology of
Inspired Action; Renee Lertzman – The
Myth of Apathy; Jim Wilson – Eco
Fascism. A final list of the groups will be
circulated with confirmation details.
Everyone attending will be asked to book
their groups by the first break; spaces on
a first come, first served basis.
15.30 - 14.00 Break
16.00 - 17.00 Open Forum
17.00 Close



Oh, sorry, is all psychology now about defining mental disorders?

lol

Understanding the intellectual gymnastics that these people use would be very informative, though. No defintion of mental disorder, much more mundane than that - just an attempt to understand one approach to deception and evasion. They're were even discussing one of the denier's favourite bogeymen - eco-fascism, lol.


Psychological extremes, like political ones,
can be closer to each other than at first
appears. The extremes of complacency
(denial) and despair (retreat), with their
common feature of narcissism, are equally
lethal in face of this pressing challenge. The
conference aims to address the obstacles
both to recognition and to effective action.


Narcissism? Perhaps. But not a disorder, just a personality trait.

Huff and puff at phantoms, though. I'm sure the energy and hot air will be well spent.

[edit on 9-3-2009 by melatonin]



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ergoli
Climate change is an undeniable reality. Deniers of climate change generally are heavily endoctrinated americans,
[edit on 9-3-2009 by ergoli]


And WHERE is YOUR evidence of this????

Could it that MAYBE
, Americans have more access to more information, and MAYBE won't just take ANYBODIES word on something until they ACTUALLY PROVE what they say!!!



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:03 AM
link   
Now I'm mentally ill?

Nonsense!!!!

(Smashes a spent bottle of tequila into a pile of burning tires while farting)

---offset those carbon emissions!



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   
What truly irritates me beyond belief, is this new term of: "Climate Change". Who in the bloody blasted world of Scientific thought has ever concluded that the Earth's Climate is static in nature? The Earth's Climate is ALWAYS, CONSTANTLY Fluctuating! There is no constant on Earth, from the Mountains, to the Beaches, and Grasslands, EVERYTHING Changes.

-4 Billion Years Ago the Earth was a Boiling Cauldron.

-65 Million Years Ago Antarctica was a Steaming Jungle.

-When the Egyptians were constructing the Sphinx, the Sahara Desert was a vast Prairie and Marsh.

-12,000 Years Ago Glaciers extended as far South as Ohio.

-10,000 Years Ago the Earth Began to Warm.

-300 Years Ago the Earth entered a Miniature Ice Age.


This is a summarization of Climatic Points of Notation in the Earth's History, but I do believe they present a point which MUST be understood by ALL. Earth's Climate NEVER remains Steady, and it will ONLY remain Steady if we screw around with it in an attempt to manipulate this Planet to fit OUR Idealistic Vision of it, NOT the Realistic Version which involves Nature taking its course.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
What truly irritates me beyond belief, is this new term of: "Climate Change". Who in the bloody blasted world of Scientific thought has ever concluded that the Earth's Climate is static in nature? The Earth's Climate is ALWAYS, CONSTANTLY Fluctuating! There is no constant on Earth, from the Mountains, to the Beaches, and Grasslands, EVERYTHING Changes.

-4 Billion Years Ago the Earth was a Boiling Cauldron.

-65 Million Years Ago Antarctica was a Steaming Jungle.

-When the Egyptians were constructing the Sphinx, the Sahara Desert was a vast Prairie and Marsh.

-12,000 Years Ago Glaciers extended as far South as Ohio.

-10,000 Years Ago the Earth Began to Warm.

-300 Years Ago the Earth entered a Miniature Ice Age.


This is a summarization of Climatic Points of Notation in the Earth's History, but I do believe they present a point which MUST be understood by ALL. Earth's Climate NEVER remains Steady, and it will ONLY remain Steady if we screw around with it in an attempt to manipulate this Planet to fit OUR Idealistic Vision of it, NOT the Realistic Version which involves Nature taking its course.








its very clever...change is like terrorism..you can fight it forever and ever...its a never ending struggle and a never ending source of fear.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by earlywatcher
You all know perfectly well that the reason for defining human caused climate change as a fact is that it makes it subject to penalties. It's about MONEY as always.


It's become about money


Though ironically the polititicians were amongst the last to wake up to the idea.

But it it was not defined as fact for monetary reasons any more that tobacco and alcohol were invented as means of taxation. After all, it;s not exactly a new idea.

And anyone who honestly thinks we can burn rain forests the area of the USA and not affect climate probably is genuinely insane .....

[edit on 10-3-2009 by Essan]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by alienesque
 





its very clever...change is like terrorism..you can fight it forever and ever...its a never ending struggle and a never ending source of fear.


Good point !. Bush had his un winnable war with terror.
And Al Gore had his un winnable war with climate change.

So whoever won the election, we were destined for a un winnable war either way.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trolloks
does this mean i will get benifits?


How about Free Health Care and Tax Credits? Maybe I can receive Employment and Housing Assistance, as well.

Heck, maybe I will even take up Summer Residence in Barrow, AK, with Summer Temperatures of 40 Degrees Fahrenheit, and Winter Cold of -50 Degrees Fahrenheit Below Zero. I am certain that they must be feeling the Heat.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
Earth's Climate NEVER remains Steady, and it will ONLY remain Steady if we screw around with it in an attempt to manipulate this Planet to fit OUR Idealistic Vision of it, NOT the Realistic Version which involves Nature taking its course.



The problem is that human society as we know it can only survive as we know it if the cimate as we know it remains largely unchanged.

Deliberately causing climate change to our detriment is not the action of an intelligent (or even sane) species. And regardlless of what you think about the effect of carbon emissions on global temperature, we are directly affecting regional climates to our detriment.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan


And anyone who honestly thinks we can burn rain forests the area of the USA and not affect climate probably is genuinely insane .....

[edit on 10-3-2009 by Essan]


Actually, the greater concern has to do with Land Erosion resulting from a lack in Tree Coverage (Which leads to such aspects as River Contamination), and Species Loss, as opposed to any sort of Widespread Climate effects. However, your point is well taken in that by Protecting the Rain Forests, we are taking part in actual conservation for a change.

Growing up not too long ago, I always heard discussions in regards to saving Plant and Animal Species. I have no problem with such aspects of Natural Preservation, as it is based upon factual issues, and I believe it to be our responsibility to not obliterate every corner of the Earth.

The real reason why "Global Warming" "issues" took over the Conservation scene, is because the very same Environmentalists involved in such became frustrated with a lack of action in regards to their individual fields of study. So they found a Natural Cyclic Variation of a Global Nature, and turned it into a Political Emergency for Election based Purposes. It is quite the wonderful cycle in its own Corrupt, Bigoted right.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
Earth's Climate NEVER remains Steady, and it will ONLY remain Steady if we screw around with it in an attempt to manipulate this Planet to fit OUR Idealistic Vision of it, NOT the Realistic Version which involves Nature taking its course.



The problem is that human society as we know it can only survive as we know it if the cimate as we know it remains largely unchanged.

Deliberately causing climate change to our detriment is not the action of an intelligent (or even sane) species. And regardlless of what you think about the effect of carbon emissions on global temperature, we are directly affecting regional climates to our detriment.



Human Society as we know it has already lived through vast periods of Climate Inequality.

The Founding Fathers of the United States managed to fight a Revolution during the middle of a 200 Year "Ice Age", as the Knights of Briton managed to United a Kingdom during a very similar Period of Climatic Chill.

The Native Americans lived, survived, and in fact thrived on the North American Continent throughout Ice Ages, and Heat Waves, Droughts, Floods, and YET, they had none of the Technology which we so currently possess.

Why is it that you believe we cannot survive any Climate Fluctuation? Do you believe the Human Species to be so weak? Mankind has survived for Millions of Years, through "Hell and High Water", and yet you somehow believe it not to be so.

If you wish to live in a World with an Intentionally Human Controlled Environment, then so be it. The World will most certainly be destroyed through such actions, in the ironic attempt you will make at the very opposite of that.

Now, as far as your first comment, well, it completely contradicts your latter statement. To in fact keep the climate "largely unchanged", would in fact require us to "Deliberately cause 'Climate Change' ".



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ergoli
Climate change is an undeniable reality. Deniers of climate change generally are heavily endoctrinated americans, generally people who are Israel supporters or also believe Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons etc.. Those people do indeed have a psychotic condition.

[edit on 9-3-2009 by ergoli]


I take it you don't regularly talk to people.

Second line...



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join