12 Jun '15 17:59>
http://phys.org/news/2015-05-climate-science-denial-affects-scientific.html
Originally posted by sonhouse"...Climate change denial in public discourse may encourage climate scientists to over-emphasise scientific uncertainty.."
http://phys.org/news/2015-05-climate-science-denial-affects-scientific.html
Originally posted by humy"They also should state clearly that none of that such basic physics relies on climate simulations but rather the climate simulations is what relies on that basic physics. It seems to me that, for some reason, many laypeople don't know that."
"...Climate change denial in public discourse may encourage climate scientists to over-emphasise scientific uncertainty.."
I think it does, and that's the basic problem. That over-emphasis of scientific uncertainty would only fuel even more climate change denial in public discourse and so on. It is a trap climate scientists shouldn't allow themselves to get ...[text shortened]... ies on that basic physics. It seems to me that, for some reason, many laypeople don't know that.
Originally posted by Metal BrainWhy do climate deniers do so? At least with those pushing ID/creationism, the motivation is clear: their religion. By what do climate change deniers hope to get of denying it? What's the motivation? Why climate change in particular?
"They also should state clearly that none of that such basic physics relies on climate simulations but rather the climate simulations is what relies on that basic physics. It seems to me that, for some reason, many laypeople don't know that."
That is absurd logic. Show us how basic physics tells us how much warming CO2 has on the atmosphere. It doesn' ...[text shortened]... at do not exist. It is like you fool yourself into believing such crap like a religious fanatic!
Originally posted by vivifyWith some people I have talked to, it is about the carbon tax or other perceived costs to do with doing something about global warming. If they deny that global warming is happening then they don't need to pay to do something about it without feeling guilty.
Why do climate deniers do so? At least with those pushing ID/creationism, the motivation is clear: their religion. By what do climate change deniers hope to get of denying it? What's the motivation? Why climate change in particular?
Also, why do most climate change deniers also seem to be religious, right-wingers? Does climate change go against their religion somehow?
Originally posted by vivify"By what do climate change deniers hope to get of denying it?"
Why do climate deniers do so? At least with those pushing ID/creationism, the motivation is clear: their religion. By what do climate change deniers hope to get of denying it? What's the motivation? Why climate change in particular?
Also, why do most climate change deniers also seem to be religious, right-wingers? Does climate change go against their religion somehow?
Originally posted by twhitehead"Also there is a correlation between religious right-wingers and conspiracy theories. Not surprising when your own party relies on lying as its main political strategy. If you lie non-stop you soon begin to think everyone else must be doing so too."
With some people I have talked to, it is about the carbon tax or other perceived costs to do with doing something about global warming. If they deny that global warming is happening then they don't need to pay to do something about it without feeling guilty.
Recognition of this is why politicians have shifted away from the whole carbon tax issue and are ...[text shortened]... itical strategy. If you lie non-stop you soon begin to think everyone else must be doing so too.
Originally posted by Metal BrainThe question was, where are you coming from in this debate? You are clearly not religious, you are probably not right wing, maybe libertarian, not sure. I get the feeling that climate change deniers, and not the ones who know there were ice ages, but the climate change going on today comes down to the idea that those folks don't want anything that effects them personally, even if the great grandchildren are the ones to suffer the consequences of inaction. 'Don't expect ME to give one dollar to support the evil Goreians'.
"Also there is a correlation between religious right-wingers and conspiracy theories. Not surprising when your own party relies on lying as its main political strategy. If you lie non-stop you soon begin to think everyone else must be doing so too."
That is the most absurd claim I have heard in a very long time. Not only is it impossible to prove it i ...[text shortened]... st cannot accept that solar is far from being able to compete with fossil fuels. Not even close!
Originally posted by C HessTo be fair to him, you could have an assertion that is both "wrong" and "can't be proven" if it IS wrong. But the fundamental problem with his assertions is that he just idiotically unintelligent shouts them out either with no premise, as in this case, or without rational premise i.e. using false inference.
How can you know "it is just plain wrong" if it can't be proven?
Originally posted by C HessHis assertion was wrong, but I think you knew that is what I was talking about. Just another of your digression tactics because you know she made a false assertion.
How can you know "it is just plain wrong" if it can't be proven?
Originally posted by Metal BrainRead this, it is a brief explanation of the refinements of CO2 heating effects, published in 1998. It says the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was 360 PPM ATT.
His assertion was wrong, but I think you knew that is what I was talking about. Just another of your digression tactics because you know she made a false assertion.
If you think anybody knows how much warming CO2 causes in the atmosphere prove it. You know it is not possible and that is why you attempt to digress.