04 Feb 2016, 7:39 pm
Seems like being an anthropogenic climate change denier these days is becoming kind of trendy. Some people are outright calling it BS and others go as far as to dig deep into tinfoil hat land and act like the entirety of the theory is just for green parties to profit. Though, naturally, it goes both ways; green parties make far more minuscule a profit than the tycoons in Saudi Arabia, surely.
Anyway, I've seen a lot of statistics, had a lot of push and pull, heard pretty much every argument you could ever conjure up. My outlook on the subject is that people are simply uneducated on climate change. I don't think they understand the complexity, that you can't just find a trend and go, "See! It's not happening!".
My tenuous grasp on climate and atmospheres from my studies don't offer me much, but the little I do understand certainly has shown me that adaptations in climate are not quite as simple as are made out to be, and that most of those that deny the theory are oversimplifying a complex problem.
Well, I support the beliefs in ACC, but it would be nice to hear other views as well. I set up a poll to get an idea of how many people on here are skeptics or firm believers. Something tells me it'll be quite divided.
_________________
Such is life, that expressing yourself and the truth has you berated.
04 Feb 2016, 7:45 pm
I did not vote because I am unsure.
My inclinations as a "tin-foil hat" wearer allow me to conceive the likelihood this would be fabricated. And it runs far deeper than political party lines. But I'll spare everyone those thoughts, and spare myself the onslaught I'm frankly not equipped to handle. But my instinct tells me it is BS because so much can be gained.
However not being educated in science I cannot debate on those terms. So I will not.
My main concern is not whether or not it is happening, or what the root causes are. It's what are the proposed solutions? That's where the really scary stuff can start to happen.
04 Feb 2016, 8:26 pm
My inclinations as a "tin-foil hat" wearer allow me to conceive the likelihood this would be fabricated. And it runs far deeper than political party lines. But I'll spare everyone those thoughts, and spare myself the onslaught I'm frankly not equipped to handle. But my instinct tells me it is BS because so much can be gained.
However not being educated in science I cannot debate on those terms. So I will not.
My main concern is not whether or not it is happening, or what the root causes are. It's what are the proposed solutions? That's where the really scary stuff can start to happen.
I didn't mean that as a sweeping generalisation, just that people always come up with crazy theories and, as you say, it runs deep. My only criticism there is that most people that actually suggest these theories usually don't have much of a grasp on the background science and much of it is all political. As I like to say, you can't make a political issue out of a scientific one.
_________________
Such is life, that expressing yourself and the truth has you berated.
04 Feb 2016, 8:35 pm
My inclinations as a "tin-foil hat" wearer allow me to conceive the likelihood this would be fabricated. And it runs far deeper than political party lines. But I'll spare everyone those thoughts, and spare myself the onslaught I'm frankly not equipped to handle. But my instinct tells me it is BS because so much can be gained.
However not being educated in science I cannot debate on those terms. So I will not.
My main concern is not whether or not it is happening, or what the root causes are. It's what are the proposed solutions? That's where the really scary stuff can start to happen.
I didn't mean that as a sweeping generalisation, just that people always come up with crazy theories and, as you say, it runs deep. My only criticism there is that most people that actually suggest these theories usually don't have much of a grasp on the background science and much of it is all political. As I like to say, you can't make a political issue out of a scientific one.
As someone who accepts many well-known "conspiracy-theories" I've come to accept the tin-foil hat thing as a bit of a badge of honor. Not saying you personally, but someone using that term in a derisive way clearly identifies themselves as a person I'm better left not speaking with in any significant way, saving me time and energy.
But yes it is scientific. And it's also political. But political in a more broad sense.
Most people who accept it's happening are also ignorant of the backing science. They aren't ridiculed the same way those proposing alternate theories are. Yet they, in my opinion, are committing a far worse offense. Is it worse to ignorantly accept what's given you, or ignorantly question it?
04 Feb 2016, 8:52 pm
My inclinations as a "tin-foil hat" wearer allow me to conceive the likelihood this would be fabricated. And it runs far deeper than political party lines. But I'll spare everyone those thoughts, and spare myself the onslaught I'm frankly not equipped to handle. But my instinct tells me it is BS because so much can be gained.
However not being educated in science I cannot debate on those terms. So I will not.
My main concern is not whether or not it is happening, or what the root causes are. It's what are the proposed solutions? That's where the really scary stuff can start to happen.
I didn't mean that as a sweeping generalisation, just that people always come up with crazy theories and, as you say, it runs deep. My only criticism there is that most people that actually suggest these theories usually don't have much of a grasp on the background science and much of it is all political. As I like to say, you can't make a political issue out of a scientific one.
As someone who accepts many well-known "conspiracy-theories" I've come to accept the tin-foil hat thing as a bit of a badge of honor. Not saying you personally, but someone using that term in a derisive way clearly identifies themselves as a person I'm better left not speaking with in any significant way, saving me time and energy.
But yes it is scientific. And it's also political. But political in a more broad sense.
Most people who accept it's happening are also ignorant of the backing science. They aren't ridiculed the same way those proposing alternate theories are. Yet they, in my opinion, are committing a far worse offense. Is it worse to ignorantly accept what's given you, or ignorantly question it?
Well, from my personal experience, I accept it because I've done at least a little bit of studying on atmospheres and climate. I'm aware of at least some of the aspects of climate change. Though primarily, it was set in stone from the overwhelming majority of the scientists who were in agreement that it was occurring. They say it's an argument from authority to claim that something is true due to the stature of those that accept it, but I personally find it reasonable to say that if scientists agree as an overwhelming majority, it's likely to be true.
_________________
Such is life, that expressing yourself and the truth has you berated.
04 Feb 2016, 8:57 pm
My inclinations as a "tin-foil hat" wearer allow me to conceive the likelihood this would be fabricated. And it runs far deeper than political party lines. But I'll spare everyone those thoughts, and spare myself the onslaught I'm frankly not equipped to handle. But my instinct tells me it is BS because so much can be gained.
However not being educated in science I cannot debate on those terms. So I will not.
My main concern is not whether or not it is happening, or what the root causes are. It's what are the proposed solutions? That's where the really scary stuff can start to happen.
I didn't mean that as a sweeping generalisation, just that people always come up with crazy theories and, as you say, it runs deep. My only criticism there is that most people that actually suggest these theories usually don't have much of a grasp on the background science and much of it is all political. As I like to say, you can't make a political issue out of a scientific one.
As someone who accepts many well-known "conspiracy-theories" I've come to accept the tin-foil hat thing as a bit of a badge of honor. Not saying you personally, but someone using that term in a derisive way clearly identifies themselves as a person I'm better left not speaking with in any significant way, saving me time and energy.
But yes it is scientific. And it's also political. But political in a more broad sense.
Most people who accept it's happening are also ignorant of the backing science. They aren't ridiculed the same way those proposing alternate theories are. Yet they, in my opinion, are committing a far worse offense. Is it worse to ignorantly accept what's given you, or ignorantly question it?
Well, from my personal experience, I accept it because I've done at least a little bit of studying on atmospheres and climate. I'm aware of at least some of the aspects of climate change. Though primarily, it was set in stone from the overwhelming majority of the scientists who were in agreement that it was occurring. They say it's an argument from authority to claim that something is true due to the stature of those that accept it, but I personally find it reasonable to say that if scientists agree as an overwhelming majority, it's likely to be true.
Fair enough. It's just not a reasoning I understand. If you have that degree of trust in them, then that is your right. I am not qualified to debate them. It doesn't mean I just believe what they say either.
04 Feb 2016, 10:00 pm
I'm wary of the climate change industry because It's dangerous when the masses are encouraged to devalue human life. I can see the sort of climate changer anti human rhetoric I frequently hear, devolving into the foundation for mass killings, or as justification for the maintenance of human deprivation. Or, just anti social leanings in general.
I'm also troubled by some of the ways that lay people are encouraged to judge this issue. Not in an epistemologically sound way, but through moral panic and a denouncing of aberrant thought. We've even started to see the term "denier" re-introduced into public discourse. I suspect that some of the promoters of climate orthodoxy might not fully appreciate the unpleasant ways that this kind of training of the public mind can pay dividends.
Last edited by Nebogipfel on 05 Feb 2016, 1:41 am, edited 7 times in total.
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,455
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
04 Feb 2016, 10:32 pm
I think whether it's predominantly anthropomorphic and a little solar or a lot solar and very little anthropomorphic we're still incredibly wise to steer away from fossil fuels as much as we can manage and innovate the alternatives. For one we're running on a super cheap and not particularly fast-replentishing resource, we need to think of an economy that can run this quick and complex when that's gone.
One of the things I wonder about also, it might be an absolutely terrible idea or it may be halfway decent providing its done right. Perhaps we should consider engineering a particular kind of grass that likes ultra-arid climate and has fast reproduction? Something that could help both as desert reclaim and as an additional carbon sump? I figure nature in that sense could work much faster and of course for free rather than having some a multibilion or evein trillion dollar solution. The most important thing with such a grass would be making sure that it didn't or wouldn't become an overpoweringly invasive species (or at least to nothing else to no other climate than to what nothing else would grow in anyway).
_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,455
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
04 Feb 2016, 10:39 pm
Here's a nice Ted for measure, not sure what's in the whole thing yet - still watching - but it looks interesting!
https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_ ... anguage=en
_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.
05 Feb 2016, 7:53 pm
One of the things I wonder about also, it might be an absolutely terrible idea or it may be halfway decent providing its done right. Perhaps we should consider engineering a particular kind of grass that likes ultra-arid climate and has fast reproduction? Something that could help both as desert reclaim and as an additional carbon sump? I figure nature in that sense could work much faster and of course for free rather than having some a multibilion or evein trillion dollar solution. The most important thing with such a grass would be making sure that it didn't or wouldn't become an overpoweringly invasive species (or at least to nothing else to no other climate than to what nothing else would grow in anyway).
I think that's all very wise. I personally believe in ACC, but regardless of whether it is occurring or not, I think it's important that we recognise that fossil fuels (non renewable and potentially going extinct) are a hazard to health. I also generally don't like the idea of monopolies on oils and other forms of non renewable fuels. It's like a double whammy of negativity.
Sorry about that. My mind doesn't usually project indecisiveness so I happened to overlook it (even though it strangely seems to be something I'd usually add to anything such as this). I'll see if I can add it in soon.
I'm also troubled by some of the ways that lay people are encouraged to judge this issue. Not in an epistemologically sound way, but through moral panic and a denouncing of aberrant thought. We've even started to see the term "denier" re-introduced into public discourse. I suspect that some of the promoters of climate orthodoxy might not fully appreciate the unpleasant ways that this kind of training of the public mind can pay dividends.
I personally find something like that to be largely irrelevant once we interpret the bigger picture. Even if it were to be a shady business, if ACC is occurring then I don't see much of a difference in how to proceed forward.
_________________
Such is life, that expressing yourself and the truth has you berated.
