Why do so many people deny climate change

[PMZ]

I deny that man is affecting the climate either way. The reasons I do are many and scientifically and empirically based.

Deny away. You're welcome to your opinion.

However due to your lack of credibility we will not act on your opinion but rather the high credibility of IPCC science.

Progressives sure do loves them some authority figures, don't they?

If you could make your own decisions, you wouldn't need others to make them for you.

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

 

[daveman]

One of the sources of denier ignorance is that they have been instructed to avoid studying the IPCC documentation just like a few years ago they were instructed to avoid Wikipedia, both for the same reason. To maintain ignorance.

Here's, therefore, the ultimate exposure for them, the IPCC AR4 summarized by Wikipedia.

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course it was the state of climate science then (2007), and is about to be superceded by AR5, the state of climate science now.

There can be no doubt that they'll want to burn AR5 too.

If AR5 doesn't acknowledge the pause in warming, it'll be good only for wrapping fish.

 

[daveman]

I just finished reading a post in which Abraham responded to a comment by posting a graph. After realizing the person he was talking to was taking visual cues from a picture and ignoring the information in the graph, I started thinking about why people deny climate change.

Tim Prosser wrote an interesting article on the subject and it came down to just a few ideas:

One is that many people who deny global warming do not have a science background. Therefore, they find themselves in a bind when dealing with the materials explaining the issue.

Additionally, climate change discussion has become so politicized and misinformation so regularly injected by those with incentive to do so that the conversation is overwhelming for many people to sort through.

And last but not least, I think the prospect of declining living standards creates an emotional response in people that in many ways shares the stages of grief. People are emotionally attached to lifestyles and it is VERY difficult to accept data that may point toward new behaviors.

K.

In 4.6 billion years. there has been only one constant to the climate of planet Earth, that constant is change.

What rational people do, is realize that the Gaea cult are moronic fuctards, and that anthropogenic global warming is the purvey of primitive apes attempting to convince others that the idiotic horseshit you peddle has some relation to legitimate science. Michael Mann is a fraud, guided by his idiotic religion, rather than by the results of scientific inquiry. Such is the case of the AGW crowd in general, who are really just a bunch of New Age nutjobs engaged in primitive animist worship.

The usual name for a belief for which there is no supporting evidence is a myth. Myths are very important in primitive cultures to explain things that are unexplained by the tribes knowledge.

We still have primitive sub cultures among us that employ myths to explain what they can't.

The post above is a good example of a myth of the primitive conservative subculture. It is a mythological explanation that's the basis for their worship of the god, Ignorance, who they believe rewards them with political power.

...says the guy who worships the IPCC.

 

[bripat9643]

Show us that proof.

http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.mckitrick.2003.pdf

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Wrong. The paper McIntyre and McKitrick wrote dissected Mann's Hockey Stick hoax and utterly destroyed it. For example, McIntyre demonstrated that if you pump pure noise through Mann's computer program that the result you get is still a hockey stick.

Mann is a fraud. You can't just cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears every time you're confronted with the evidence that your god is bogus.

 

[daveman]

Deny away. You're welcome to your opinion.

However due to your lack of credibility we will not act on your opinion but rather the high credibility of IPCC science.

Progressives sure do loves them some authority figures, don't they?

If you could make your own decisions, you wouldn't need others to make them for you.

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Like most progressives, you make the mistake of confusing "educated" and "intelligent".

There is no particular intelligence required to regurgitate a professor's own opinions back at him and getting a good grade for it.

 

[Abraham3]

Progressives sure do loves them some authority figures, don't they?

If you could make your own decisions, you wouldn't need others to make them for you.

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Like most progressives, you make the mistake of confusing "educated" and "intelligent".

There is no particular intelligence required to regurgitate a professor's own opinions back at him and getting a good grade for it.

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Who are you more educated than?

Seriously?

 

[daveman]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Like most progressives, you make the mistake of confusing "educated" and "intelligent".

There is no particular intelligence required to regurgitate a professor's own opinions back at him and getting a good grade for it.

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

Oh, look: Another prog who confuses "educated" with "intelligent".

George Bush was educated. Do you think he's intelligent?

 

[daveman]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Who are you more educated than?

Seriously?

High school freshmen -- by two years.

 

[Abraham3]

Like most progressives, you make the mistake of confusing "educated" and "intelligent".

There is no particular intelligence required to regurgitate a professor's own opinions back at him and getting a good grade for it.

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

Oh, look: Another prog who confuses "educated" with "intelligent".

George Bush was educated. Do you think he's intelligent?

People don't earn PhDs by parroting back their professor's words. It requires original research defended in front of a board.

 

[SSDD]

The fact of AGW is a simple calculation. The dynamics are not, nor is predicting the future behavior of mankind.

Really? A simple calculation that can not be demonstrated in any real world experiment. My but you are gullible.

fact of ice and snow melting is certainly observable. Where and when it will stop, nobody knows, but could be the difference between an affordable and an unaffordable adaptation by mankind.

Melting ice and snow is evidence of warming, and certain other weather related phenomena...it is in no way evidence that our activites bear any responsibility. There isn't the first bit of hard evidence to prove that man is driving the global climate.

 

[SSDD]

The existence of positive feedbacks, and the fact that we have not agreed to a path forward relative to ongoing use of FFs, makes that answer unknowable with certainty.

The best climate minds in the country have estimated the range of possibilities to be 3 to 12 degrees C.

Ithought you used the IPCC reports as a bible? Where did you get 3-12C from? AR5 is back to 1.5-4.5C isn't it?

Neither you nor I have seen AR5.

However, I'll have to see if I erred. As I think about it now, it might be 3-12 degrees Fahrenheit.

Doesn't nine degrees strike you as a large spread for a simple calculation?

 

[SSDD]

The answers to all of your questions are known and accepted as standard quantum physics by virtually every qualified scientist on the planet. You chose to reman ignorant of that science. Your choice, but nobody owes you a thing in response to your choices.

Quantum physics? That branch of physics that is rife with contradictions and inconsistencies? That branch of physics that has to fabricate an ad hoc "fix" to even explain the electron cloud of a hydrogen atom? Right.

That branch of physics of which you are woefully ignorant.

If you are unaware of the fact that QM is chock full of inconsistencies and contradictions to the point that it can't even adequately explain the periodic table, then I am afraid that it is you who is woefully ignorant.

 

[SSDD]

Show us that proof.

http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.mckitrick.2003.pdf

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Interesting that you think a paper published in a reputable journal is an opinion.

 

[orogenicman]

http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.mckitrick.2003.pdf

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Interesting that you think a paper published in a reputable journal is an opinion.

It's irrelevant, as has been pointed out numerous times.

 

[SSDD]

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Interesting that you think a paper published in a reputable journal is an opinion.

It's irrelevant, as has been pointed out numerous times.

Stated numerous times...proven zero times..

 

[Old Rocks]

Lomborg: “Don’t blame climate change for extreme weather”

Written By : William Teach, September 14, 2013

I’m shocked that the Washington Post has allowed this op-ed to be published, which blows away so many of the myths of extreme weather and “climate change”, many of which have been exposed time and again by many Climate Realists

Read story with links @ Lomborg: ?Don?t blame climate change for extreme weather? | Right Wing News

And here's his closing comment:

It is understandable that a lot of well-meaning people, wanting stronger action on global warming, have tried to use the meme of extreme weather to draw attention. But alarmism and panic are rarely the best way to achieve good policies. The argument that global warming generally creates more extreme weather needs to be retired.

Yep. Rightwingnut news. Who the hell else would publish Lomborg?

Real scientists writing on the site of the largest Scientific Society in the world, the American Institute of Physics.

Causes;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Effects;

Insurance Industry Sees Risk of Climate Fueled Extremes | Climate Denial Crock of the Week

 

[bripat9643]

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

Oh, look: Another prog who confuses "educated" with "intelligent".

George Bush was educated. Do you think he's intelligent?

People don't earn PhDs by parroting back their professor's words. It requires original research defended in front of a board.

You are so gullible it's scary.

 

[bripat9643]

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Interesting that you think a paper published in a reputable journal is an opinion.

It's irrelevant, as has been pointed out numerous times.

The fact that Michael Mann's Hockey Stick graph is a fraud is irrelevant?

 

[bripat9643]

Lomborg: “Don’t blame climate change for extreme weather”

Written By : William Teach, September 14, 2013

I’m shocked that the Washington Post has allowed this op-ed to be published, which blows away so many of the myths of extreme weather and “climate change”, many of which have been exposed time and again by many Climate Realists

Read story with links @ Lomborg: ?Don?t blame climate change for extreme weather? | Right Wing News

And here's his closing comment:

It is understandable that a lot of well-meaning people, wanting stronger action on global warming, have tried to use the meme of extreme weather to draw attention. But alarmism and panic are rarely the best way to achieve good policies. The argument that global warming generally creates more extreme weather needs to be retired.

Yep. Rightwingnut news. Who the hell else would publish Lomborg?

Real scientists writing on the site of the largest Scientific Society in the world, the American Institute of Physics.

Causes;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Effects;

Insurance Industry Sees Risk of Climate Fueled Extremes | Climate Denial Crock of the Week

If you looked up "mindless drone" in the dictionary, you can see your picture there.