10 Common Climate Change Denier Myths

[mamooth]

If the world gets warmer, guess what?

The human race can spread into vast tracts of Canada, Russia and Greenland that are currently uninhabitable.

And Canada, Russia and Greenland are fine with that?

Plus, there's that little problem of no soil. Granite outcroppings and acidic arctic muck won't grow anything but moss. But since this is a denier fantasy, reality won't slow anyone down.

 

[Blackrook]

If the world gets warmer, guess what?

The human race can spread into vast tracts of Canada, Russia and Greenland that are currently uninhabitable.

And Canada, Russia and Greenland are fine with that?

Plus, there's that little problem of no soil. Granite outcroppings and acidic arctic muck won't grow anything but moss. But since this is a denier fantasy, reality won't slow anyone down.

At some point in this argument, you're going to have to explain to me why should I care if all these bad things happen.

 

[mamooth]

The 97% number is a total lie, and they know it.

It's roughly accurate, as it's been confirmed multiple ways.

At this stage, only the most desperate deniers still try to deny they own status as a kook fringe anti-science minority.

 

[mamooth]

At some point in this argument, you're going to have to explain to me why should I care if all these bad things happen.

Non-sociopaths don't require an explanation.

We could try to give you one, but it wouldn't help. After all, you're not capable of processing the fact that people besides yourself matter.

 

[mamooth]

And every Leftard leader flies private jets and lives in several mansions.

Even if true, and it's not, it doesn't affect the science one bit.

And every bit of that science says you're part of a kook fringe anti-science liars' cult.

 

[mamooth]

Believe in the science...

Science says it's bad to eat shit. Therefore, by your standard, everyone should be eating shit.

Do you now understand how dumb your "This bit of science was once wrong, so we should reject all science!" standard is?

 

[mamooth]

I forecast this change about three months ago and everyone laughed at me...

You've been predicted an imminent ice-age non-stop for over 5 years running now.

Instead, it just keeps getting warmer.

You keep failing as badly as it's possible for any human to fail, so of course everyone is going to keep laughing.

 

[Weatherman2020]

And every Leftard leader flies private jets and lives in several mansions.

Even if true, and it's not, it doesn't affect the science one bit.

And every bit of that science says you're part of a kook fringe anti-science liars' cult.

You can’t even tell me which bathroom a human with a penis should use, Mr Science. And yes, every Democrat running flies private jets.

Bonus:

A single ‘paper mill’ appears to have churned out 400 papers, sleuths find

Have a nice day with your pseudo science.

 

[ReinyDays]

The 97% number is a total lie, and they know it.

It's roughly accurate, as it's been confirmed multiple ways.
At this stage, only the most desperate deniers still try to deny they own status as a kook fringe anti-science minority.

So you're fine with the abstract of a scientific paper not even mentioning climate change be counted as full endorsement? ...

In that case, we have a perfect consensus that water is not wet ... not a single abstract to any scientific paper states that water is, in fact, wet ...

You're such a fool ...

 

[mamooth]

#1 is running fast and loose with the facts ... we didn't measure the Sun's output 1 million years ago, it's impossible to tie that to climate ...

We know solar output is dropping now, while climate is warming. Thus, the "it's the sun!" argument is debunked. If you disagree, explain to everyone how a cooling sun makes it warmer.

#2 is our basic theory, demonstrating this theory is correct doesn't seemed to have happened yet ..

That's correct. Nobody has demonstrated that your crazy "CO2 is a trace gas, so it can't affect climate" theory is right. All of the hard data says your theory is wrong.

The Temperature vs. Carbon Dioxide graph is fraudulent ...

No, both curves are accurate.

I believe CO2 has only been being regularly measured since 1945 (and I'd be happy to be wrong in that guess) ...

very accurate proxies go back much farther.

#3 is an example of selective pooling ...

The responses here are examples of how deniers auto-reject any data that contradicts their cult scripture. They also contradict their own "consensus doesn't matter!" mantras. If it doesn't matter, why are they so keen to shoot down the idea?

#8 is seriously misinformed ... on several different levels ... this insults me: "A recent study evaluated 17 climate model projections published between 1970 and 2007, with forecasts ending on or before 2017." ... what about the other 1700 climate model projections?

What about them? Do they exist anywhere outside of denier conspiracy theories?

... that should be 14 of the 1717 projections are right, or 0.8% chance ...

You're putting forth the conspiracy theory that all the models were bad, but you haven't backed up that conspiracy theory with any hard data. That is, you just made it up. If you don't want to be laughed at, you'll need to show us how all these models have supposedly failed.

#9 and the Big Rip would too ...

A variation of the stupid "Well, the world might end, so why worry about this!" fallacy, and thus an obvious deflection.

 

[Blackrook]

At some point in this argument, you're going to have to explain to me why should I care if all these bad things happen.

Non-sociopaths don't require an explanation.

We could try to give you one, but it wouldn't help. After all, you're not capable of processing the fact that people besides yourself matter.

I care about the 60 million unborn babies you murdered.

Why did you murder all those unborn babies?

I think YOU are the sociopath, not ME.

 

[fncceo]

Believe in the science...

Science says it's bad to eat shit. Therefore, by your standard, everyone should be eating shit.

Do you now understand how dumb your "This bit of science was once wrong, so we should reject all science!" standard is?

I believe the take away here is to be skeptical of claims to authority and do your own investigation.

 

[mamooth]

So you're fine with the abstract of a scientific paper not even mentioning climate change be counted as full endorsement? ...

I'm fine with not mentioning the flat earth being an endorsement of the round earth theory. The obvious doesn't have to be stated again and again.

In that case, we have a perfect consensus that water is not wet ... not a single abstract to any scientific paper states that water is, in fact, wet ...

Because the obvious is that water is wet.

You're such a fool ...

Says the flat-earther. You are consistent, right? Either you're a "skeptic of the round earth", or you're not consistent.

 

[mamooth]

I care about the 60 million unborn babies you murdered.

So, you need to deflect, and you want my attention. Don't worry. I'll go over to that thread and ream you out soon.

In the meantime, thanks for pointing out how most deniers embrace the entire suite of stupid conservative beliefs. Those dumb to fall for one conspiracy theory invariably fall for a bunch conspiracy theories.

 

[mamooth]

I believe the take away here is to be skeptical of claims to authority and do your own investigation.

And deniers almost never do that. Instead, they auto-declare that the actual science is all a conspiracy because it disagrees with their politics. If it's not approved by TheParty, they won't look at it.

In contrast, all of the rational people here are very familiar with every denier argument.

 

[wamose]

We should be embracing climate change, especially after the sea comes up and washes so many useless East Coast liberals away.

 

[mamooth]

You can’t even tell me which bathroom a human with a penis should use,

That's how you're going to jeepdeflect from the fact that all the sceince says you're a cult crank, by obsessing about penises and bathrooms? I suppose because all the data contradicts you, that's the only choice you see as viable.

And yes, every Democrat running flies private jets.

If you want to live in a cave and hump trees, go right ahead. Your penis-obsessed hippy lifestyle may be depraved, but it's not really hurting anyone.

Just don't try to force us to live in caves with you. We like modern technology. That's why we're trying to keep the lights on, and trying to stop you from leaving humanity shivering in the dark when the fossil fuels run out.

 

[mamooth]

We should be embracing climate change, especially after the sea comes up and washes so many useless East Coast liberals away.

Not all deniers are violent sociopaths who desire death for everyone their cult told them to hate, but the majority are.

 

[wamose]

We should be embracing climate change, especially after the sea comes up and washes so many useless East Coast liberals away.

Not all deniers are violent sociopaths who desire death for everyone their cult told them to hate, but the majority are.

And not all liberal climate alarmists have a sense of humor in spite of all the funny things they believe in.

 

[fncceo]

I believe the take away here is to be skeptical of claims to authority and do your own investigation.

And deniers almost never do that. Instead, they auto-declare that the actual science is all a conspiracy because it disagrees with their politics. If it's not approved by TheParty, they won't look at it.

In contrast, all of the rational people here are very familiar with every denier argument.

Once science becomes politicized, by both sides, there is little to no chance of hearing any objective facts.

However, regardless of the actual situation, I don't agree that giving more money and power to politicians is a cure.

Any 'solution' to climate change that includes that without strict controls on politicians is a non starter.