How can we destroy climate change sceptics?

[MobBoss]

Jesus look, I'll make it real simple for you: He didnt say humans never make things up, he said there was no proof that these scientists made things up.

You dont think Climate-gate isnt proof of that? /whatever.

 

[RedRalph]

You dont think Climate-gate isnt proof of that? /whatever.

I didn't say that Mobboss, and your 'Oh hey all of a sudden I'm not able to understand anyone's posts so I'll argue points they aren't making' act is very tedious and totally ineffective. If it works in real life you must be surrounded by idiots.

 

[MobBoss]

I didn't say that Mobboss, and your 'Oh hey all of a sudden I'm not able to understand anyone's posts so I'll argue points they aren't making' act is very tedious and totally ineffective. If it works in real life you must be surrounded by idiots.

See that little quote button on the console? If this is so tedious dont push it.

And my last post asked you a question. Could you stop ranting about me long enough to actually answer it?

 

[RedRalph]

See that little quote button on the console? If this is so tedious dont push it.

And my last post asked you a question. Could you stop ranting about me long enough to actually answer it?

Oh I don't know much about this climategate thing, definitely not enough to make a judgement, but I can spot you using evasive tactics easily. I'm somewhat of an expert on it.

 

[MobBoss]

Oh I don't know much about this climategate thing, definitely not enough to make a judgement, but I can spot you using evasive tactics easily. I'm somewhat of an expert on it.

Rofl, apparently your hobby of making me the topic isnt that tedious then is it?

Less angst RRW, and more subject. Just a suggestion.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In other words, I think global warming is way over-hyped.

It is, in the media.

You dont think Climate-gate isnt proof of that? /whatever.

Have you read 1,037 of the e-mails? These guys did.

AP IMPACT: Science not faked, but not pretty

BY SETH BORENSTEIN, RAPHAEL SATTER and MALCOLM RITTER

LONDON (AP) -- E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data - but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

The clue is in the bolded part, and of course they mean Climate Change as a result of Global Warming. Certainty is a word a scientist should rarely use, and certainly D) not in this field.

 

[MobBoss]

The clue is in the bolded part, and of course they mean Climate Change as a result of Global Warming. Certainty is a word a scientist should rarely use, and certainly D) not in this field.

Excellent point, and a huge part of the problem since certain people (Gore) speak upon it with absolute certainty.

 

[PredatorFett]

Climate change does exist, but it's not worth politicizing. And it darn sure doesn't mean the end of the world. It is a CYCLE, just like every other weather abnormality in the past. People don't cause global warming, however it does exist.

 

[aelf]

Do I think they made it up? No.

But I think people see what they want to see.

In other words, I think global warming is way over-hyped.

Of course the climate is changing, but I think our effect on it is minimal. The planets climate has been changing ever since the thing formed. Sure I am for living with less pollution, but lets be real. I dont think we have that much ability to alter the climate for good or bad, and its simply going to require us to continue to adapt as we have for millenia......or go kaput.

Well, I said AGW not climate change.

Do you think these scientists are in someone's pay? Or do you think they are trying to benefit from this somehow (research grants, publicity, bigger egos, etc)? Or both?

 

[MobBoss]

Do you think these scientists are in someone's pay? Or do you think they are trying to benefit from this somehow (research grants, publicity, bigger egos, etc)? Or both?

I dont claim to know why. It could be a combination of all those things, or it simply could be science tribalism.....often it seems to me that this group acks a lot like a popular high school clique, and those of differing opinion get ostracized. Simply could be an adult case of "if you dont agree with us you dont get to set with us at lunch" syndrome which is a behavior that humans, regardless of intelligence, often seem to fall into, and as we have already heard from Cutlass, they are indeed human.

 

[aelf]

I dont claim to know why. It could be a combination of all those things, or it simply could be science tribalism.....often it seems to me that this group acks a lot like a popular high school clique, and those of differing opinion get ostracized. Simply could be an adult case of "if you dont agree with us you dont get to set with us at lunch" syndrome which is a behavior that humans, regardless of intelligence, often seem to fall into, and as we have already heard from Cutlass, they are indeed human.

That explains why they might maintain their (erroneous?) beliefs, but it doesn't explain the impetus to believe in them in the first place.

 

[REDY]

Well everybody knows that wasting planet is wrong, I am not suprised that some fake their results to support more green policy. There arent two equal options.

 

[aelf]

Well everybody knows that wasting planet is wrong, I am not suprised that some fake their results to support more green policy. There arent two equal options.

But practically everybody fakes their results? I don't think so.

 

[Millman]

Does anyone else sense we're beating around the you know what. It's easy to pick out certain elements of a subject in an attempt to justify one action or thought over the other.

Generally, as the most intelligent species known in the solar system, aren't we responsible for the planet and ourselves no matter how small the problem?

If it's true that there's bad climate change because of us then we might have to take away the rights of those who try to deny it.

On the other hand, if the sceptics think others are lying, then can we ask them if humanity hasn't had a negative impact on the earth of any kind?

I'm pretty sure there are animals and plants that people have claimed to have that aren't around anymore.

But I don't know if posting on one forum on the web will change anyone's mind.

 

[Roman Legion]

"How can we destroy climate change skeptics?"

Curious, Just because someone does not believe as you do, You wish them destroyed?

 

[aelf]

"How can we destroy climate change skeptics?"

Curious, Just because someone does not believe as you do, You wish them destroyed?

If someone doesn't believe that I should live for another day without a good reason, I would wish them destroyed.

So, yes, that's not the right question to ask.

 

[Berzerker]

so I should wish you dead for wanting to live in a cooler world?

 

[REDY]

But practically everybody fakes their results? I don't think so.

If you followed what Mobboss said, my post is just idea how complete puzzle. I honestly dont know how it works, I didnt meet with scientists and didnt see their work and I as other people I rely on scientist conclusions. I only see in tv enthusiastic scientists who love nature and consider it as their duty defend it. Enviromentalism came from society´s demand based on feelings, not from scientists and research.

 

[Camikaze]

"How can we destroy climate change skeptics?"

Curious, Just because someone does not believe as you do, You wish them destroyed?

You know I get the impression that 'destroy climate change sceptics' meant either destroying their scepticism, or destroying their disproportionate political sway which results in inaction.

 

[Bast]

No, its not irrelevant to his comment about them being human. Human error, and their ability make stuff up (lie) are well known. Climate scientists arent immune to doing that since they are indeed human.

As to climate change. Saying the climate is changing is like saying water is wet. The planets climate has been ever changing since it formed an atmosphere...

If you actually knew anything about the climate history of the planet, you'll know that changes occur over millions or least thousands of years. Not centuries and certainly not decades. The current anthropogenic climate change is an issue because it's happening so quickly as is the rise in CO2 ppm concentration.