• 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

ataraxia said:
So "proper scientist" must be whoever is the best salesman to the uneducated and scientifically illiterate lay public.

Hmmm, somehow that doesn't sound right.
Click to expand...

No.

You have to be able to think for your self. If you can't, and you can't, shut up.
 
Free Thinker said:
I have been called a denier because I say who cares if the planet's climate is changing? Humans that's who. The biggest parasite ever known to the globe.

Does the last of any species mourn it's extinction? Does the Elk or Rat care if the oceans rise? Or it gets hotter? Nope they adapt or die out.

Maybe we should concentrate our efforts on sensible ways to reduce our population before the planet does it for us. Worrying about the weather is a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Or maybe you are a traitor to humanity and a defeatest.

There is no significan trouble from a slightly warmer world as per the IPCC's max climate predictions.
 
ataraxia said:
No, I'm easy. I would be happy with you finding anything that even remotely resembles the meaning of those terms.
Click to expand...

Lol you didn’t define your first term. How can you expect me to know what you mean by these turn of phrases?

Please stop taking us off topic.
You say there is consensus. I’m asking what the consensus is about. If you cannot explain what the consensus is about, then we cannot continue. 5th time. I’m still waiting. Please tell me what is is they have consensus about.
 
ataraxia said:
You don't either.

Those experts working in the field, however, do.

So who should we listen to?
Click to expand...

I think you need to name 10 experts you accept their word on this topic. Should be easy on you.

My experts are
1. Richard Lindzen
2. Judith Curry
3. Anthony Watts
4. Chuck Weiss
5. Bjorn Lomborg
6. Jonny Fagerstrom
7. Dr. William Happer
8. Why Apocalyptic Claims About Climate Change Are Wrong
9. Alarmists using oil as the excuse

We note that this is their cause. To end oil production.

It is wrong headed but nothing stops this deception.

Also, we do not deny climate changes. We often cite for the record many many instances of climate change so we can't deny climate changes.s

We do not accept humans as the cause for sound scientific reasons.

Such as the ice masses once covering our North East states is melted. And lakes left behind. Clearly climate changed. But man did not melt the glaciers then nor today.

One more factor is that the alarmists refuse to blame India nor China and focus on blaming the USA.
 
Robertinfremont said:
I think you need to name 10 experts you accept their word on this topic. Should be easy on you.

My experts are
1. Richard Lindzen
2. Judith Curry
3. Anthony Watts
4. Chuck Weiss
5. Bjorn Lomborg
6. Jonny Fagerstrom
7. Dr. William Happer
8. Why Apocalyptic Claims About Climate Change Are Wrong
9. Alarmists using oil as the excuse

We note that this is their cause. To end oil production.

It is wrong headed but nothing stops this deception.

Also, we do not deny climate changes. We often cite for the record many many instances of climate change so we can't deny climate changes.s

We do not accept humans as the cause for sound scientific reasons.

Such as the ice masses once covering our North East states is melted. And lakes left behind. Clearly climate changed. But man did not melt the glaciers then nor today.

One more factor is that the alarmists refuse to blame India nor China and focus on blaming the USA.
Click to expand...

Love when a denier demands that one should have ten experts...

And then can’t even find ten experts and fills the list with a Forbes editorial and ‘alarmists’. Not to mention a TV weatherman.
 
ataraxia said:
Percentage wise, there are about as many as those who question basic evolutionary biology or who tell us UFO abductions with anal probings are real.

Like any profession, science has its share of eccentrics, kooks, charlatans, and those just not keeping up with their latest journals.
Click to expand...

You keep wandering off the reservation. So to humor you, just what to you think the Evolution theory of Darwin says to all of us? (I hope Darwin is not the sole source of a theory)

I can do what you do and leap to the ridiculous as well. What about the Sun God?
 
Tim the plumber said:
Or maybe you are a traitor to humanity and a defeatest.

There is no significan trouble from a slightly warmer world as per the IPCC's max climate predictions.
Click to expand...

The scientific community disagrees with you
 
Threegoofs said:
Love when a denier demands that one should have ten experts...

And then can’t even find ten experts and fills the list with a Forbes editorial and ‘alarmists’. Not to mention a TV weatherman.
Click to expand...

No, you supplied none. Not even 1. And I figured the under 10 was not going to make you happy. But you never mind making the rest of us unhappy.

Again, I refuse to deny climate changes. Do you want to deny it is the man god changing climate?

To have it man, you assign to man a status like a god.
 
ataraxia said:
Says who? Until you can convince people who actually know something about the subject, you should not be taken seriously. This is not the place to do it.
Click to expand...
That is what the data says.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs...time_series/HadCRUT.4.6.0.0.annual_ns_avg.txt
In my case I choose 1950 as the cutoff, because that is what the IPCC choose as a demarcation point,
and we had a known warming perturbation that ended by 1950, based on decade averages.
I also needed to allow a time window sufficiently large to allow for equalization, even by Hansen's standard, (25 to 50 years for 60%).
You can try other combinations, it is simply a mater of picking a warming perturbation, to some point in time,
and that becomes the input to amplified feedbacks, Subtract out the net forcing warming, and what is left is the unaccounted for warming.
The possible errors are that the feedbacks could be faster than 50 years, and would start to feedback on themselves (as feedbacks are expected to do),
but this error would only make the predictions more absurd.
 
Tim the plumber said:
No.

You have to be able to think for your self. If you can't, and you can't, shut up.
Click to expand...

So education and experience don't matter in terms of whose opinion should be given more weight?

If someone is shot in the chest, and the surgeon is recommending we do something, would you dismiss them and tell everyone you have thought this through yourself and know better?

Someone hands you the scalpel. What are you going to do? Are you going to think it through yourself?
 
ataraxia said:
Nope. That's just what YOU say the data says. Scientists disagree. Go tell them they are wrong.
Click to expand...
I do not think they really do!
https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/sp...documents/group/climphys/knutti/otto13nat.pdf
The most likely value of equilibrium climate sensitivity based on the energy budget of the most recent decade is 2.0 °C,
Click to expand...
For ΔT, we use the HadCRUT4 ensemble data set of surface temperatures averaged globally and by decade.
Click to expand...
Why does that sound familiar?
Keep in mind that Otto used a lower forcing number than the normal 3.71W/m2,
We use a value of F2x of 3.44 W m–2
Click to expand...
This would increase the amount of unaccounted for feedback to 2C.
Did I mention that Otto was one of the lead authors on IPCC AR5?
You see when people, even scientist look at the empirical data, the sensitivity of 2XCO2 gets lower.
 
longview said:
I do not think they really do!
https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/sp...documents/group/climphys/knutti/otto13nat.pdf


Why does that sound familiar?
Keep in mind that Otto used a lower forcing number than the normal 3.71W/m2,

This would increase the amount of unaccounted for feedback to 2C.
Did I mention that Otto was one of the lead authors on IPCC AR5?
You see when people, even scientist look at the empirical data, the sensitivity of 2XCO2 gets lower.
Click to expand...

Note that he didnt put this into the IPCC, which is the functional consensus document.


But you dont care, because you read an article once, and thats what you’re sticking with!
 
ataraxia said:
OK. But you think you are more qualified than all of the scientific organizations on the entire planet.

Which one is more ridiculous?
Click to expand...

I do not claim that at all.

I believe in my formal study of weather, it opened my eyes to a lot that most pay no attention to though.

I believe until you master the math of weather, and climate, you merely are chatting.

My major theme is stop fearing weather and climate change.
 
Robertinfremont said:
I do not claim that at all.

I believe in my formal study of weather, it opened my eyes to a lot that most pay no attention to though.

I believe until you master the math of weather, and climate, you merely are chatting.
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you mean by "formal". Unless you have a PhD in the field from a certified university and years of experience working in it, you are going to have a tough time convincing anyone you have mastered anything. Lots of people study lots of things on their own, and are still filled with lots of misunderstandings and misconceptions of the field.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Or maybe you are a traitor to humanity and a defeatest.

There is no significan trouble from a slightly warmer world as per the IPCC's max climate predictions.
Click to expand...

And besides who's to say what the ideal temperature of this place is anyway? To understand the climate hoax just follow the money.

Humanity ain't got nothing to do with this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom