Pages:
Author

Topic: Why are some people still skeptical about climate change? - page 12. (Read 22181 times)

legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
am just trying to understand why some people in society are still skeptical about climate change even though there are scientific proof.

There's nothing wrong and everything right about being skeptical about things people try to scare you into doing, believing, and paying for based on their assertion that there's "scientific proof of climate change."

That's a separate issue from how, why and what they are trying to extort from you.

copper member
Activity: 150
Merit: 30
I think you mean those people who believe that HIV doesn't exist, you will have horns and tail from genetically modified products, and no need for vaccination.
Most people aren't very smart. Without having an opinion and not understanding the essence of the issue, they're happy to relay other people's thoughts that aren't always adequate.
When you start arguing with them suddenly it turns out that your a rapist from frozen wasteland.

It always amazes me how accurately the descriptions that leftists try to use to demonize people usually quite accurately describe their own behavior.

Perhaps present some empirical data to support your argument. Character attacks aren't going to do anything but reassure existing true believers, and at most make less people have a debate openly while they question your conclusions privately.

BTW... Obvious sock puppet is obvious.

So sock puppet or loon? I'm confused
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
I think you mean those people who believe that HIV doesn't exist, you will have horns and tail from genetically modified products, and no need for vaccination.
Most people aren't very smart. Without having an opinion and not understanding the essence of the issue, they're happy to relay other people's thoughts that aren't always adequate.
When you start arguing with them suddenly it turns out that your a rapist from frozen wasteland.

It always amazes me how accurately the descriptions that leftists try to use to demonize people usually quite accurately describe their own behavior.

Perhaps present some empirical data to support your argument. Character attacks aren't going to do anything but reassure existing true believers, and at most make less people have a debate openly while they question your conclusions privately.

BTW... Obvious sock puppet is obvious.
copper member
Activity: 150
Merit: 30
I think you mean those people who believe that HIV doesn't exist, you will have horns and tail from genetically modified products, and no need for vaccination.
Most people aren't very smart. Without having an opinion and not understanding the essence of the issue, they're happy to relay other people's thoughts that aren't always adequate.
When you start arguing with them suddenly it turns out that your a rapist from frozen wasteland.
jr. member
Activity: 233
Merit: 1
Or maybe because people don`t know about it?
For example, I haven’t heard for the last time that the media talk about it.
Probably everyone has ever heard this word combination, but few people understand well what it is.
I think the media should talk more about this, give concrete facts, studies, forecasts of scientists, etc. It is necessary for people to understand that this is a real problem and a threat to humanity.
But unfortunately, the media almost don`t engage in such an important matter.
Therefore, people don`t understand.
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027
How can people be skeptical of climate change   we have summer winter climate change in action ..

Something you all should know about climate change ..

Climate change is fresh air tax  you do all know this don't you ?  I will explain my case..

We are getting told that bad gases are heating the earth up and we need to tax this bad gas because of climate change it's heating the earth up ..

Ok if the bad gas is heating the earth up who pays for this tax   the business owners ? OR will it get passed on to your average joe meaning cost will go up because of bad gas
that heats the earth up and now poor mary will need more money to live?..

Now about this bad gas tax that heats the earth up  say you clean the gas to good gas  what will happen to the heat source REMEMBER you took the bad gas out what about the heat source ?..

If i light 1 fire in a 100 sq ft  it will be warm  if i light 30 fires in 100 sq ft you will boil  NOW what about all the heat sources how do you know that's the cause of the earth warming up so no matter even if you clean the bad gases what about the heat source and don't forget heat travels up  SO the more people want to live like the west the more heat sources from cars homes factories   SO is it the bad gas OR the heat source all over the planet and heat rises ..

Now we are getting TRICKED into paying for air pollution when is it the pollution or the heat source that heats the earth up?..

The more homes built and factories the more heat sources and heat rises up ..But we will be paying taxes for air pollution because that's the cause of climate change when it might not even be that it could be the heat source AND what i mean by this is after years and years of paying taxes for pollution will we end up finding out it's not the pollution it was the heat source  remember heat rises ..

And how many want to live the modern way?  more heat sources rising heat all over the globe  and we get told to pay for bad gases when it might not even be because of the gas  And it might not be even for the heat source just good old earth moving around ..

Now who benefits from carbon tax?  Instead of making a doomsday thing up why not just say greedy businesses your getting taxed instead of blaming climate for collecting
more taxes?..  Just say we are taxing you because we need this because you make enough greedy bunch of peoples..

I wonder who gets kickbacks for the climate taxes the POLITICIANS?  more taxes for them to feed their families ..

Remember Diesel more healthy than petrol so you would go out and buy a Diesel   now Diesel is bad for you   all so you would buy a Diesel   so i wonder did VW give politicians kickbacks for this lie   well how many did they sell Wink..Just like carbon tax ..

Now how do we stop the heat source?  well we can't  so forget your tax just stop the bad gases without the tax thanks..

Because we might be paying for nothing when all along it's the heat source and not the carbon gases ..
jr. member
Activity: 126
Merit: 5
I think that most people do not even think about such global problems. People are more interested in their personal minor problems than global and common ones. Collective responsibility is not peculiar to a person. It turns out everyone is guilty and no one personally. Therefore, people are not very worried about such problems.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
When we talk about some people, I think Donald Trump is one of them. He is very much skeptical about climate change.

Sure.

It's hard to not be skeptical when you see politicians wanting to take your money to roll back the oceans.

newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
When we talk about some people, I think Donald Trump is one of them. He is very much skeptical about climate change.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
Why would anyone think that changes in climate (climate change) isn't happening or hasn't happened? It is all around us?

The thing that is misleading is the way some people have made the term "climate change" to mean something that they expressly want us to believe, when there isn't any proof for it.

Consider this. Scientists claim that evolution happened over millions of years, and that humans have been around for at least 100,000 years. Did climate change wipe out the human race over that time? No! Did each of those people die? Yes!

Go look at the cemeteries and see if people die. Go find someone who is over 200 years old so that we can see that maybe people don't die after all.

You're gonna die! With or without climate change, you're gonna die.

Climate change is a bunch-of-lies program some elite have set in place to play on your fears in ways so that they can gain control over you and your money.

Cool

There is some evidence that we were almost wiped out about 70,000 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory#Genetic_bottleneck_theory

Today, the problem is several magnitudes larger but we have the technology to muddle through and continue to destroy our habitat.

Ignorance is bliss.  You can deny it, but it will not change the fact that each year young people get their driver's licenses and buy new homes, built on farmlands.  

As more people join the pollution train than leave it, you have a positive feedback loop that nobody is talking about.


Anybody who has enough time on his hands to talk about climate change, is living in luxury. Many people are living hand-to-mouth, working 3 jobs to support a family, and their spouse is working, as well. Climate change doesn't matter to them as much as preparing for winter snows.

Climate change doesn't mean anything at all except to those who have leisure time to sit around and ponder it... the elite, for making and advertising all kinds of fear-mongering ideas about it... and the beer-sucking, couch-potatoes who have time to sit around and listen to the elite.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
It'a pretty funny that people link "conservipedia" as scientific evidence.

Holy shit, might as well just post an entire "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" as your argument.

Hey, guys, YOU'RE ALL WRONG BECAUSE *PEDIA says so - idiots from the right.


They don't even argue the merits of the science. They literally just spread misinformation and bullshit without actually reading or understanding the evidence.

People need to start paying attention to the sides. The side offering science evidence vs the side offering feelings.

I find it hilarious you lecture me about arguing the merits of science when literally all you just did was attack the source, without addressing a single one of its refutations, or my own for that matter. I explained my position, refuting yours, using simple language and provided sources to back it up. Now you try.
full member
Activity: 574
Merit: 152
It'a pretty funny that people link "conservipedia" as scientific evidence.

Holy shit, might as well just post an entire "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" as your argument.

Hey, guys, YOU'RE ALL WRONG BECAUSE *PEDIA says so - idiots from the right.


They don't even argue the merits of the science. They literally just spread misinformation and bullshit without actually reading or understanding the evidence.

People need to start paying attention to the sides. The side offering science evidence vs the side offering feelings.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
....

Long story short, the IPCC has been shown to not take into account urban heat islands when placing temperature monitoring stations leading so skewed (higher) measurements. In addition their models are based off of the data presented by Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which has been proven to have manipulated the past data....

The IPCC also ignored solar influences on climate. Which is really pretty stupid if you think about it.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
Rather than respond bluefirecorp_ just continues to move on, not bothering to support his premise with proof. It is much easier to sell bullshit when you stay away from facts and debate stuff that has no demonstrable direct causal connection.

Stop running away and making excuses.
QUOTE YOUR EMPIRICAL DATA SUPPORTING THE THEORY .....

But the sock puppets support the theory too!

Look at the consensus!
full member
Activity: 574
Merit: 152
Quote
Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse
gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts
on human and natural systems. 1

1. Each finding is grounded in an evaluation of underlying evidence and agreement. In many cases, a synthesis of evidence and agreement supports an
assignment of confidence. The summary terms for evidence are: limited, medium or robust. For agreement, they are low, medium or high. A level of
confidence is expressed using five qualifiers: very low, low, medium, high and very high, and typeset in italics, e.g., medium confidence. The following
terms have been used to indicate the assessed likelihood of an outcome or a result: virtually certain 99–100% probability, very likely 90–100%,
likely 66–100%, about as likely as not 33–66%, unlikely 0–33%, very unlikely 0–10%, exceptionally unlikely 0–1%. Additional terms (extremely
likely 95–100%, more likely than not >50–100%, more unlikely than likely 0–<50%, extremely unlikely 0–5%) may also be used when appropriate.
Assessed likelihood is typeset in italics, e.g., very likely. See for more details: Mastrandrea, M.D., C.B. Field, T.F. Stocker, O. Edenhofer, K.L. Ebi, D.J. Frame,
H. Held, E. Kriegler, K.J. Mach, P.R. Matschoss, G.-K. Plattner, G.W. Yohe and F.W. Zwiers, 2010: Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Geneva, Switzerland, 4 pp.

Quote
Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven
largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. This has led to atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are unprecedented in
at least the last 800,000 years. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers,
have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been
the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. {1.2, 1.3.1}


Quote
The evidence for human influence on the climate system has grown since the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). It is
extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was
caused by the anthropogenic increase in GHG concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate
of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period (Figure SPM.3). Anthropogenic
forcings have likely made a substantial contribution to surface temperature increases since the mid-20th century
over every continental region except Antarctica4
. Anthropogenic influences have likely affected the global water cycle since
1960 and contributed to the retreat of glaciers since the 1960s and to the increased surface melting of the Greenland ice
sheet since 1993. Anthropogenic influences have very likely contributed to Arctic sea-ice loss since 1979 and have very likely
made a substantial contribution to increases in global upper ocean heat content (0–700 m) and to global mean sea level rise
observed since the 1970s. {1.3, Figure 1.10}


Quote
It is virtually certain that there will be more frequent hot and fewer cold temperature extremes over most land areas on daily
and seasonal timescales, as global mean surface temperature increases. It is very likely that heat waves will occur with a
higher frequency and longer duration. Occasional cold winter extremes will continue to occur. {2.2.1}
---
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf
jr. member
Activity: 233
Merit: 1
Greed, lack of information, misinformation, lack of education, ignorance, Stupidity, and populism. That pretty much sums it up.

Unfortunately it's true. Our society isn`t ripe yet to realize the danger of global warming and to start doing something. But I'm afraid when everyone realizes it, it will be too late.
full member
Activity: 203
Merit: 102
Greed, lack of information, misinformation, lack of education, ignorance, Stupidity, and populism. That pretty much sums it up.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Well, put it this way: people deny or hate anything they don't understand and know nothing about. Worst is misinformation. These days it's so easy to get information from everyone and everywhere, and most of them are false. If they don't believe in climate change, let them believe otherwise. Someday, when the climate gets worst, to the point where it will affect our civilization, they will finally understand and believe it's real after all. Just you wait and see.

They'll deny it then even. Blame it on the wraith of God or some other nonsense. People absolutely refuse to accept reality.

I do agree with the sentiment that there's not really much reason to argue with them. They're not looking to change their opinion.

--

Climate getting to that point won't really be good for anyone. Think of the animals. Think of the children.

--
As more people join the pollution train than leave it, you have a positive feedback loop that nobody is talking about.

We needed radical, dramatic change globally years ago. We've just entered the start of the loop. Hopefully, we'll be able to make a technological break through to solve the problem globally. Awareness simply won't work. It seems there's a loud bunch of people that are science-denying idiots. It's the same shit as anti-vaxers, flat-earthers, moon-conspiracist, etc.

To be honest, other than an amazing megastructure that can offset our carbon emissions, I don't see the science making way for a lot of the active individuals here in politics and society, regardless of how much evidence is presented.


Since you have opted to ignore me since you have realized you are incapable of debating me logically, I have decided I will simply just start replying to your other comments Smiley

I haven't seen anyone here bring God into this except for you, just now. This is just more character assassination having nothing to do with the facts. "Radical" change huh? Such as what? Oh please do tell me your plans to fix this problem you think humans are causing.

You don't see the science making way.... WAT? WTF does that even mean. Also if you want to convince people, perhaps post some actual empirical data instead of projections, theories, and simulations and pretending they are facts.
full member
Activity: 574
Merit: 152
Well, put it this way: people deny or hate anything they don't understand and know nothing about. Worst is misinformation. These days it's so easy to get information from everyone and everywhere, and most of them are false. If they don't believe in climate change, let them believe otherwise. Someday, when the climate gets worst, to the point where it will affect our civilization, they will finally understand and believe it's real after all. Just you wait and see.

They'll deny it then even. Blame it on the wraith of God or some other nonsense. People absolutely refuse to accept reality.

I do agree with the sentiment that there's not really much reason to argue with them. They're not looking to change their opinion.

--

Climate getting to that point won't really be good for anyone. Think of the animals. Think of the children.

--
As more people join the pollution train than leave it, you have a positive feedback loop that nobody is talking about.

We needed radical, dramatic change globally years ago. We've just entered the start of the loop. Hopefully, we'll be able to make a technological break through to solve the problem globally. Awareness simply won't work. It seems there's a loud bunch of people that are science-denying idiots. It's the same shit as anti-vaxers, flat-earthers, moon-conspiracist, etc.

To be honest, other than an amazing megastructure that can offset our carbon emissions, I don't see the science making way for a lot of the active individuals here in politics and society, regardless of how much evidence is presented.
Pages:
Jump to: