Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. 20 Apr '14 12:21 / 1 edit
    http://phys.org/news/2014-04-conspiracy-theories-climate-denial-cognitive.html

    "...
    ...

    In general, the people who believe in conspiracy theories are low on trust and feel that they have been treated badly by life or society.

    Countering this is very difficult, but education and reducing inequality will go a long way
    ...
    ...
    The most striking thing is that conspiratorial thinking can be self-contradictory, for example people think MI6 killed Princess Diana while also thinking that she faked her own death.

    ...
    in general, conspiracism is just one form of "motivated cognition". There are others, such as worldview defence. The reason worldviews are inflamed by climate change is because of the threat of government interference with the free market that might result from mitigation efforts. It is for this reason that people who cherish free markets are less inclined to oppose mitigation when it is framed as providing an opportunity for the nuclear industry than when it is framed as pollution cuts.
    Bottom line: It is pretty clear that fear of the solutions drives much opposition to the science. This manifests itself in motivated cognition, and one form of that is conspiracism. That said, it is notable that other science denial – for instance HIV-AIDS – also involves conspiracism, and the links to worldviews are less clear there.

    ...
    There are some people who are so entrenched in their contrarian views that there is little point in talking to them about anything other than solutions.
    ...

    scientists themselves could refine their messaging. Often they put the uncertainty first, without saying what we do know or without saying that uncertainty is a compelling reason to mitigate.
    ..."

    I assume "motivated cognition" generally means "delusional thinking" in layperson terms?
  2. 21 Apr '14 11:17
    I think two things contribute to conspiracy theories: 1) Governments lie on some matters. The wrong conclusion is that tht governments lie about everything. 2) Lack of science education.
  3. 21 Apr '14 12:03
    Originally posted by humy
    http://phys.org/news/2014-04-conspiracy-theories-climate-denial-cognitive.html

    "...
    ...

    In general, the people who believe in conspiracy theories are low on trust and feel that they have been treated badly by life or society.

    Countering this is very difficult, but education and reducing inequality will go a long way
    ...
    ...
    The most striking thing ...[text shortened]... ..."

    I assume "motivated cognition" generally means "delusional thinking" in layperson terms?
    You mean like Clair Patterson? He was obviously a conspiracy theorist until he was proven right.
    At least the tobacco industry did not pump lead into the atmosphere and deny it was a health hazard to everyone that breathes air.
    CO2 is not killing anybody, but many left wing crackpots want to think it is a poison that is destroying the earth. No comparison at all, but Patterson was one of those unknown heroes that is mostly buried in the pages of history. He was the conspiracy theorist that was proven right.

    http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey-sneak-peek-clair-patterson/544iij9
  4. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    21 Apr '14 12:12
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    You mean like Clair Patterson? He was obviously a conspiracy theorist until he was proven right.
    At least the tobacco industry did not pump lead into the atmosphere and deny it was a health hazard to everyone that breathes air.
    CO2 is not killing anybody, but many left wing crackpots want to think it is a poison that is destroying the earth. No compari ...[text shortened]... ://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey-sneak-peek-clair-patterson/544iij9
    So you have your own little conspiracy theory going, that CO2 is not bad for Earth. The real deal is, TOO MUCH CO2 is bad for people. The planet will get by just fine so in that regard you are right. Too much CO2 and the climate changes as it is now and there is no denying that fact. The deniers have some kind of political agenda to do just that, disregarding any consequences to their own grandchildren, as long as they get their buck now.

    This IS a conspiracy, a conspiracy to kill off half the human race.
  5. 21 Apr '14 12:23
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    So you have your own little conspiracy theory going, that CO2 is not bad for Earth. The real deal is, TOO MUCH CO2 is bad for people. The planet will get by just fine so in that regard you are right. Too much CO2 and the climate changes as it is now and there is no denying that fact. The deniers have some kind of political agenda to do just that, disregardi ...[text shortened]... they get their buck now.

    This IS a conspiracy, a conspiracy to kill off half the human race.
    CO2 is a plant nutrient. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

    BTW, don't just throw around the term "deniers" loosely. If you are going to use that term be specific what I am denying. I am not denying climate change and fully accept that the earth is warming. I simply don't think we should be running around causing panic and attempting things that probably will not work to make left wing nut jobs like you happy that we are throwing money at it.

    Half of the human race??? LOL!!!!!
    Good one, Chicken Little. Ridiculous claims like that are exactly why GW alarmists like you are not being taken seriously.
  6. 21 Apr '14 12:32
    http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx?MenuItemID=103
  7. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    21 Apr '14 12:33
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    CO2 is a plant nutrient. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

    BTW, don't just throw around the term "deniers" loosely. If you are going to use that term be specific what I am denying. I am not denying climate change and fully accept that the earth is warming. I simply don't think we should be running around causing panic and attempting things that proba ...[text shortened]... Ridiculous claims like that are exactly why GW alarmists like you are not being taken seriously.
    We'll see who is right about that in 50 years or so.
  8. 21 Apr '14 12:44
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    We'll see who is right about that in 50 years or so.
    Hey, if you really care you should discourage indoor cannabis growing and encourage outdoor cannabis growing. The sun already shines bright. There is little need to burn fossil fuels to generate electricity to run grow lights.

    I suggest you start a "build a fence, not a grow light" movement and save some coal for the next generation.
  9. 21 Apr '14 12:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    CO2 is a plant nutrient. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

    BTW, don't just throw around the term "deniers" loosely. If you are going to use that term be specific what I am denying. I am not denying climate change and fully accept that the earth is warming. I simply don't think we should be running around causing panic and attempting things that proba ...[text shortened]... Ridiculous claims like that are exactly why GW alarmists like you are not being taken seriously.
    CO2 is a plant nutrient.

    Yes, we already know photosynthesis. What does that have to do with CO2 from burning fossil fuels causing global warming?
  10. 21 Apr '14 12:49 / 9 edits
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    You mean like Clair Patterson?
    No, I mean like those that base their conspiracies on illogic.
    The rest of your post is irrelevant because of this.
    Did I say you cannot rationally have a conspiracy theory? -answer, no.
  11. 21 Apr '14 14:26
    Originally posted by humy
    CO2 is a plant nutrient.

    Yes, we already know photosynthesis. What does that have to do with CO2 from burning fossil fuels causing global warming?
    Absolutely nothing, but I suppose Metal Brain takes offense at the concept of "conspiracy nuts" since he is one.
  12. 21 Apr '14 14:37
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    At least the tobacco industry did not pump lead into the atmosphere and deny it was a health hazard to everyone that breathes air.
    CO2 is not killing anybody, but many left wing crackpots want to think it is a poison that is destroying the earth.
    Forgive my bruised, hungover brain, but are you saying that too much of anything good, is always good?
  13. 21 Apr '14 15:47
    Originally posted by humy
    No, I mean like those that base their conspiracies on illogic.
    The rest of your post is irrelevant because of this.
    Did I say you cannot rationally have a conspiracy theory? -answer, no.
    But Clair Patterson was considered a fringe nut by many scientists....until he was proven right. There was also a conspiracy to suppress his factual theories as well.

    Is it only when conspiracy theories are proven right that they are not scoffed at by people like you? It is easy to be a status quo troll but not so easy to do it and be right. Being right doesn't matter to guys like you though, only the perception of being right. That is all that matters to you and kazet, the other troll that decides his opinions with a poll.
  14. 21 Apr '14 15:52
    Originally posted by humy
    CO2 is a plant nutrient.

    Yes, we already know photosynthesis. What does that have to do with CO2 from burning fossil fuels causing global warming?
    We need more CO2 in the atmosphere. More CO2 is good.

    Global warming is also good. I can live with it and so can you. Sonhouse thinks half the population will die because of it but that is because he is a nutjob that believes absurd things because he puts political ideology first and science second. People like that make poor scientists.
  15. 21 Apr '14 15:55
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Absolutely nothing, but I suppose Metal Brain takes offense at the concept of "conspiracy nuts" since he is one.
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

    ad hominem
    You attacked your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.

    Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone's case without actually having to engage with it.