• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The psychology of climate change denial

Bergslagstroll said:
Here are quote from the sources.

"The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.1

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate."

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2 Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response."

Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

"The impacts of climate change are already being felt in communities across the country. More frequent and intense extreme weather and climate-related events, as well as changes in average climate conditions, are expected to continue to damage infrastructure, ecosystems, and social systems that provide essential benefits to communities. Future climate change is expected to further disrupt many areas of life, exacerbating existing challenges to prosperity posed by aging and deteriorating infrastructure, stressed ecosystems, and economic inequality. Impacts within and across regions will not be distributed equally. People who are already vulnerable, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events and are expected to experience greater impacts. Prioritizing adaptation actions for the most vulnerable populations would contribute to a more equitable future within and across communities. Global action to significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions can substantially reduce climate-related risks and increase opportunities for these populations in the longer term."

Fourth National Climate Assessment

There Trump also have tried to influence the agencies by for example appointing a former climate deniers as head for NASA, but there Trump failed because the evidence is so overwhelming.

Trump's NASA Chief Changed His Mind on Climate Change. He Is a Scientific Hero. | Space
Click to expand...

So the order of that is;

1, Human activity has made the world warmer to some degree, 95% chance. NOBODY DISAGREES with that. ALthough the 95%? I'd say for all not mad poeple who have a clue about climate science should be 100%.

2, That the have been more extreme weather. NOPE!!!! No such things have been found. No data to back that.

3, "exacerbating existing challenges to prosperity posed by aging and deteriorating infrastructure, stressed ecosystems, and economic inequality" utter throwing of as much **** at the target in the hope some of it must stick surely!. Get a grip!

4, "People who are already vulnerable, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events and are expected to experience greater impacts." The wrold has never been richer. You are richer, more powerful over the world around you, than your parents ever were. Your capacity to deal with bad weather is far better than anybody has ever had. The richer people are the better they can deal with it all. Making the world poorer is a bad thing. Get a grip!

Get out of your cult.
 
Tim the plumber said:
So the order of that is;

1, Human activity has made the world warmer to some degree, 95% chance. NOBODY DISAGREES with that. ALthough the 95%? I'd say for all not mad poeple who have a clue about climate science should be 100%.

2, That the have been more extreme weather. NOPE!!!! No such things have been found. No data to back that.

3, "exacerbating existing challenges to prosperity posed by aging and deteriorating infrastructure, stressed ecosystems, and economic inequality" utter throwing of as much **** at the target in the hope some of it must stick surely!. Get a grip!

4, "People who are already vulnerable, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events and are expected to experience greater impacts." The wrold has never been richer. You are richer, more powerful over the world around you, than your parents ever were. Your capacity to deal with bad weather is far better than anybody has ever had. The richer people are the better they can deal with it all. Making the world poorer is a bad thing. Get a grip!

Get out of your cult.
Click to expand...

Are you claiming that Trump, that have said that climate change is a Chinese hoax, is also are part of the cult?

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."

That both federal agencies under Donald Trump and also fossil fuel companies have to acknowledge the urgent need for action.

Statements on Paris climate agreement | ExxonMobil

That the evidence is so overwhelming so that climate change shouldn't be a partisan issue. There renewables could also create a lot of opportunities for rural Republican areas.

Why Republican Leaders Love Renewable Energy
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Are you claiming that Trump, that have said that climate change is a Chinese hoax, is also are part of the cult?

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."

That both federal agencies under Donald Trump and also fossil fuel companies have to acknowledge the urgent need for action.

Statements on Paris climate agreement | ExxonMobil

That the evidence is so overwhelming so that climate change shouldn't be a partisan issue. There renewables could also create a lot of opportunities for rural Republican areas.

Why Republican Leaders Love Renewable Energy
Click to expand...

1, There is no evidence that stands up to any scrutiny, even if you take the IPCC's numbers, that there is any trouble of any significance at all.

2, You are clearly highly motivated without the slightest clue. Others can be just the same as you. It only takes a very few fraudulent/narccissiticly mad scientists to allow you to find some support and generally you can't even find that.

You are impervious to numbers.
 
Tim the plumber said:
1, There is no evidence that stands up to any scrutiny, even if you take the IPCC's numbers, that there is any trouble of any significance at all.

2, You are clearly highly motivated without the slightest clue. Others can be just the same as you. It only takes a very few fraudulent/narccissiticly mad scientists to allow you to find some support and generally you can't even find that.

You are impervious to numbers.
Click to expand...

Why haven't federal agencies under Republican presidents or fossil fuel companies scientists been able to disprove manmade global if it is as you claim are "no evidence that stands up to any scrutiny"?

That fossil fuel companies are among the most profitable in the world and have known about manmade global warming for over fifty year.

Oil industry knew of 'serious' climate concerns more than 45 years ago | Business | The Guardian

There fossil fuel companies also have spend enormous amount of money on trying to delay the transition.

Oil And Gas Giants Spend Millions Lobbying To Block Climate Change Policies [Infographic]

Scientists reveal how the fossil fuel industry misled the public about climate change

While Trump wants to spend billions of dollar on propping up unprofitable coal plants.

Daily chart - Donald Trump hopes to save America’s failing coal-fired power plants | Graphic detail | The Economist

That the reality is instead that the evidence is overwhelming and we are now running out of time.

Thirty-one top scientific societies speak with one voice on global climate change – The Ecological Society of America

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06876-2
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Why haven't federal agencies under Republican presidents or fossil fuel companies scientists been able to disprove manmade global if it is as you claim are "no evidence that stands up to any scrutiny"?

That fossil fuel companies are among the most profitable in the world and have known about manmade global warming for over fifty year.

Oil industry knew of 'serious' climate concerns more than 45 years ago | Business | The Guardian

There fossil fuel companies also have spend enormous amount of money on trying to delay the transition.

Oil And Gas Giants Spend Millions Lobbying To Block Climate Change Policies [Infographic]

Scientists reveal how the fossil fuel industry misled the public about climate change

While Trump wants to spend billions of dollar on propping up unprofitable coal plants.

Daily chart - Donald Trump hopes to save America’s failing coal-fired power plants | Graphic detail | The Economist

That the reality is instead that the evidence is overwhelming and we are now running out of time.

Thirty-one top scientific societies speak with one voice on global climate change – The Ecological Society of America

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06876-2
Click to expand...

It is better to read the post you are replying to.

My point is that all the supposed bad things, the changes in climate, do not show any significant trouble. That all of these bad things that I am able to look at don't even stand up to scrutiny makes it even more plain that there is a con on.

How do you know what the motivations of the various industrial groups are? How do you know that they are not simply crippling competion within their own sectors under the cover of all this Green crap?
 
Tim the plumber said:

It is better to read the post you are replying to.

My point is that all the supposed bad things, the changes in climate, do not show any significant trouble. That all of these bad things that I am able to look at don't even stand up to scrutiny makes it even more plain that there is a con on.

How do you know what the motivations of the various industrial groups are? How do you know that they are not simply crippling competion within their own sectors under the cover of all this Green crap?
Click to expand...

So are you claiming that Trump on one hand wants to spend billions of dollar on helping coal plants while on the other hand secretly works to undermine their business by having his federal agencies promote what according to you his bad science about climate change?

Also are you claiming that the fossil fuel companies on one hand spends hundred of millions on delaying action on climate change while on the other side is for some secret goal are promoting what according to you his bad science about climate change? There that science also threaten their main business that have given them billions of dollars in profit.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
So are you claiming that Trump on one hand wants to spend billions of dollar on helping coal plants while on the other hand secretly works to undermine their business by having his federal agencies promote what according to you his bad science about climate change?

Also are you claiming that the fossil fuel companies on one hand spends hundred of millions on delaying action on climate change while on the other side is for some secret goal are promoting what according to you his bad science about climate change? There that science also threaten their main business that have given them billions of dollars in profit.
Click to expand...

Again read the words I have written. Try to do it without being all mad and angry.

I don't care about Trump. I think he is also a natural con artist. the best thing I can say about him is that he is good at spotting other cons.

The action you think the fossil fuel companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on is remarkable invisable. I think if some group spent so much on this debate I would notice it. I see lot of propaganda constantly pumped out about the doom of a slightly warmer world but I see very little supported counter argument. The extinction rebellion group in the UK managed to have weeks long protest in London where they had the protesters living in hotels in London during the protest. Good going for a group that had been in existance for 3 months. That takes money and organisation. I see no such well funded counter.
 
[h=2]The toxic rhetoric of climate change[/h][FONT=&quot]Posted on December 14, 2019 by curryja | 141 comments[/FONT]
by Judith Curry
“I genuinely have the fear that climate change is going to kill me and all my family, I’m not even kidding it’s all I have thought about for the last 9 months every second of the day. It’s making my sick to my stomach, I’m not eating or sleeping and I’m getting panic attacks daily. It’s currently 1 am and I can’t sleep as I’m petrified.” – Young adult in the UK
Continue reading →
 
Tim the plumber said:
Again read the words I have written. Try to do it without being all mad and angry.

I don't care about Trump. I think he is also a natural con artist. the best thing I can say about him is that he is good at spotting other cons.

The action you think the fossil fuel companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on is remarkable invisable. I think if some group spent so much on this debate I would notice it. I see lot of propaganda constantly pumped out about the doom of a slightly warmer world but I see very little supported counter argument. The extinction rebellion group in the UK managed to have weeks long protest in London where they had the protesters living in hotels in London during the protest. Good going for a group that had been in existance for 3 months. That takes money and organisation. I see no such well funded counter.
Click to expand...

You even have a coal lobbyist has head of EPA.

Trump Nominates Andrew Wheeler, Coal Lobbyist, to Head EPA | Time

Also it's not just Trump, that you have had eight years of the Bush administration and many Republicans in Congress that have denied the urgent need for action. That even with that massive influence from deniers the evidence is so strong that both federal agencies under Donald Trump and the fossil fuel companies have to acknowledge the urgent need for action.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
You even have a coal lobbyist has head of EPA.

Trump Nominates Andrew Wheeler, Coal Lobbyist, to Head EPA | Time

Also it's not just Trump, that you have had eight years of the Bush administration and many Republicans in Congress that have denied the urgent need for action. That even with that massive influence from deniers the evidence is so strong that both federal agencies under Donald Trump and the fossil fuel companies have to acknowledge the urgent need for action.
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
Again read the words I have written. Try to do it without being all mad and angry.

I don't care about Trump. I think he is also a natural con artist. the best thing I can say about him is that he is good at spotting other cons.

The action you think the fossil fuel companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on is remarkable invisable. I think if some group spent so much on this debate I would notice it. I see lot of propaganda constantly pumped out about the doom of a slightly warmer world but I see very little supported counter argument. The extinction rebellion group in the UK managed to have weeks long protest in London where they had the protesters living in hotels in London during the protest. Good going for a group that had been in existance for 3 months. That takes money and organisation. I see no such well funded counter.

Maybe if I keep saying it some of it might get through to you.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
Again read the words I have written. Try to do it without being all mad and angry.

I don't care about Trump. I think he is also a natural con artist. the best thing I can say about him is that he is good at spotting other cons.

The action you think the fossil fuel companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on is remarkable invisable. I think if some group spent so much on this debate I would notice it. I see lot of propaganda constantly pumped out about the doom of a slightly warmer world but I see very little supported counter argument. The extinction rebellion group in the UK managed to have weeks long protest in London where they had the protesters living in hotels in London during the protest. Good going for a group that had been in existance for 3 months. That takes money and organisation. I see no such well funded counter.

Maybe if I keep saying it some of it might get through to you.
Click to expand...

I see no great counter group to the round earthers. Must be a conspiracy
 
vegas giants said:
I see no great counter group to the round earthers. Must be a conspiracy
Click to expand...

There obviously is a counter to them, the flat earth idiots. The thing is that neither side is especially well funded, they don't have massive actions demonstrating all over the world. There is no constant message from either side. So I conclude that none of them have massive financial backing.
 
Tim the plumber said:
There obviously is a counter to them, the flat earth idiots. The thing is that neither side is especially well funded, they don't have massive actions demonstrating all over the world. There is no constant message from either side. So I conclude that none of them have massive financial backing.
Click to expand...

This is freaking hilarious
 
vegas giants said:
I love your theory. If an argument is well funded......it must be fake. Lol
Click to expand...

No. You, as always take the exact opposite to what I am clearly saying.

If a political argument is well funded it is obviously so due to the coverage and demonstrations that that funding enables.

That both sides of the flat/round earth are not well funded is shown by the lack of such actions.

You constantly amaze me at the capacity for functional humans to be so without the ability to think at all.
 
Tim the plumber said:
No. You, as always take the exact opposite to what I am clearly saying.

If a political argument is well funded it is obviously so due to the coverage and demonstrations that that funding enables.

That both sides of the flat/round earth are not well funded is shown by the lack of such actions.

You constantly amaze me at the capacity for functional humans to be so without the ability to think at all.
Click to expand...

Well this is not a political argument.


This is science
 
vegas giants said:
Well this is not a political argument.


This is science
Click to expand...

I'm never quite sure if you are Trolling or just have no memory what so ever. This exchange between us is about the comparison of funding between the Alarmist side and the Skeptic side. How loud each side is able to be in society.
 
Tim the plumber said:
I'm never quite sure if you are Trolling or just have no memory what so ever. This exchange between us is about the comparison of funding between the Alarmist side and the Skeptic side. How loud each side is able to be in society.
Click to expand...

The side of AGW is the side of science. If it is loud then it is because the evidence is overwhelming
 
vegas giants said:
The side of AGW is the side of science. If it is loud then it is because the evidence is overwhelming
Click to expand...

The loudness is well funded advocay. Demonstrations and all.

The science you have no clue about at all. You have demonstrated that many many times.
 
Tim the plumber said:

The loudness is well funded advocay. Demonstrations and all.

The science you have no clue about at all. You have demonstrated that many many times.
Click to expand...

Your opinion is noted and dismissed
 
PoS said:
I'll take $10,000 for the first choice, Alex.
Click to expand...

Mostly yes, but if it was true then the level of intelligence to do it as well does not fit with the abject lack of memory/honesty. I think I have encountered this very often. People become utterly stupid when they talk about their religion. Normally clever people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom