Why do so many people deny climate change

[bripat9643]

BriPat-

You really do need to try and understand what 'appeal to authority' means.

It does not mean that the side with no scientific backing wins.

Ah, because true science is based on consensus....

No, Unhinged, as usual you have everything upside down and backwards.

Actually, the consensus is based on the true science.

Ah, science - something you know nothing about. Too bad you're such an ignorant brainwashed retard.

How do we know it's "true science?" Because all the "climate scientists" sucking on the government tit say so.

 

[bripat9643]

The thinking process is that of connecting objects based on some emotional connection, rather than the actual structure of the objects. "I like it" and "I don't like it" is the typical connection. "I like this authority" and "I like this idea" becomes the connection. It is pretty meaningless.

It's funny how, when their appeal to authority gets trounced, they get all upset.

You have described the liberal thinking process beautifully.

 

[PMZ]

BriPat-

You really do need to try and understand what 'appeal to authority' means.

It does not mean that the side with no scientific backing wins.

Ah, because true science is based on consensus....

AGW "scientists" reach a consensus on a new hockey stick graph

Science has reached more than a consensus among those who are qualified to understand climate science. The IPCC.

Politics has reached a consensus among media conservatives. The only way to dump the consequences of energy glutiny on others is to deny the science.

 

[PMZ]

What "appeal to authority" of ours are you referring to?

The depth of insertion of your nose in the ass of conservative media entertainers is certainly a clue.

In other words, nothing. I have never claimed anything is true simply because Rush Limbaugh says it's true. The appeal to authority is your stock in trade, not mine.

What exactly is Rush Limbaugh an authority on? I can't think of a single topic. He's an uneducated irrational blowhard.

 

[PMZ]

Ah, because true science is based on consensus....

No, Unhinged, as usual you have everything upside down and backwards.

Actually, the consensus is based on the true science.

Ah, science - something you know nothing about. Too bad you're such an ignorant brainwashed retard.

How do we know it's "true science?" Because all the "climate scientists" sucking on the government tit say so.

True science is what educated scientists are skilled in. It has nothing to do with conservative politics.

 

[bripat9643]

The depth of insertion of your nose in the ass of conservative media entertainers is certainly a clue.

In other words, nothing. I have never claimed anything is true simply because Rush Limbaugh says it's true. The appeal to authority is your stock in trade, not mine.

What exactly is Rush Limbaugh an authority on? I can't think of a single topic. He's an uneducated irrational blowhard.

Who ever said he was an authority on anything? You still don't get this "appeal to authority" thing do you?

 

[bripat9643]

BriPat-

You really do need to try and understand what 'appeal to authority' means.

It does not mean that the side with no scientific backing wins.

Ah, because true science is based on consensus....

AGW "scientists" reach a consensus on a new hockey stick graph

Science has reached more than a consensus among those who are qualified to understand climate science. The IPCC.

Politics has reached a consensus among media conservatives. The only way to dump the consequences of energy glutiny on others is to deny the science.

Who determined the IPCC was qualified to rule on who was qualified to understand climate science? Why, the IPCC, of course.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I feel sorry for people that don't believe in climate charge I'll pray for you.

 

[PMZ]

Ah, because true science is based on consensus....

AGW "scientists" reach a consensus on a new hockey stick graph

Science has reached more than a consensus among those who are qualified to understand climate science. The IPCC.

Politics has reached a consensus among media conservatives. The only way to dump the consequences of energy glutiny on others is to deny the science.

Who determined the IPCC was qualified to rule on who was qualified to understand climate science? Why, the IPCC, of course.

The good thing about education is that people are certified in terms where they stand in terms of education. Those certificates are called degrees. You don't have any so you are not qualified.

The IPCC didn't create the IPCC. They have no obligation to you. You are not educated enough to even understand what they do.

 

[westwall]

I feel sorry for people that don't believe in climate charge I'll pray for you.

Who ever said we don't "believe" in climate change? We most certainly do. We also understand that it is ever changing. It is only in the fevered imaginations of the religious fanatic that climate is ever "stable". A more absurd assertion would be hard to fathom.

 

[Abraham3]

That's probably why no one has ever suggested such a thing

 

[bripat9643]

Science has reached more than a consensus among those who are qualified to understand climate science. The IPCC.

Politics has reached a consensus among media conservatives. The only way to dump the consequences of energy glutiny on others is to deny the science.

Who determined the IPCC was qualified to rule on who was qualified to understand climate science? Why, the IPCC, of course.

The good thing about education is that people are certified in terms where they stand in terms of education. Those certificates are called degrees. You don't have any so you are not qualified.

So what does that mean, that only those with degrees and determine who has a degree? What makes you qualified to determine anything about climate? Did you Electrical Engineering degree make you an "authority" on climate? The guy who runs the IPCC is a railroad engineer. According to your epistemology, that makes him unqualified to determine anything about climate, doesn't it?

BTW, I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering, numskull.

The IPCC didn't create the IPCC. They have no obligation to you. You are not educated enough to even understand what they do.

Does the IPCC have any obligations of any kind? How about to tell the truth?

I'm educated enough to know a con when I see one. Changing your story every time the facts change is the sure sign of a con, and following such cons is the sure sign of a sucker.

 

[bripat9643]

That's probably why no one has ever suggested such a thing

Mathew just did.

 

[SSDD]

I feel sorry for people that don't believe in climate charge I'll pray for you.

Pray to who? Gaia?

None of us skeptics deny that the climate is changing...it is always changing. What we want to see is actual proof that man is responsible for the change...proof that doesn't exist in any form outside of a computer model which is no proof at all.

 

[PMZ]

I feel sorry for people that don't believe in climate charge I'll pray for you.

Who ever said we don't "believe" in climate change? We most certainly do. We also understand that it is ever changing. It is only in the fevered imaginations of the religious fanatic that climate is ever "stable". A more absurd assertion would be hard to fathom.

We have no choice but to accept what nature decides but we have the responsibility and power to decide what humanity does. We are in control of the consequences of our actions.

That is except for conservatives who have never met a problem that they couldn't ignore. Regardless of the cost of that ignor-ance.

 

[PMZ]

I feel sorry for people that don't believe in climate charge I'll pray for you.

Who ever said we don't "believe" in climate change? We most certainly do. We also understand that it is ever changing. It is only in the fevered imaginations of the religious fanatic that climate is ever "stable". A more absurd assertion would be hard to fathom.

The truth that you find so inconvenient that you need to deny it is Agw.

 

[PMZ]

Who determined the IPCC was qualified to rule on who was qualified to understand climate science? Why, the IPCC, of course.

The good thing about education is that people are certified in terms where they stand in terms of education. Those certificates are called degrees. You don't have any so you are not qualified.

So what does that mean, that only those with degrees and determine who has a degree? What makes you qualified to determine anything about climate? Did you Electrical Engineering degree make you an "authority" on climate? The guy who runs the IPCC is a railroad engineer. According to your epistemology, that makes him unqualified to determine anything about climate, doesn't it?

BTW, I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering, numskull.

The IPCC didn't create the IPCC. They have no obligation to you. You are not educated enough to even understand what they do.

Does the IPCC have any obligations of any kind? How about to tell the truth?

I'm educated enough to know a con when I see one. Changing your story every time the facts change is the sure sign of a con, and following such cons is the sure sign of a sucker.

There is simply no way someone with your limited cognitive ability could make it through an engineering education. Either you lie or were dropped on your head since.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mankind must counteract AGW by pushing Earth farther from the Sun. At noon today please hop up an down on Earth to push it further from the Sun.

When people ask you what you're doing you can tell them you're doing your part to change the climate

 

[PMZ]

Who determined the IPCC was qualified to rule on who was qualified to understand climate science? Why, the IPCC, of course.

The good thing about education is that people are certified in terms where they stand in terms of education. Those certificates are called degrees. You don't have any so you are not qualified.

So what does that mean, that only those with degrees and determine who has a degree? What makes you qualified to determine anything about climate? Did you Electrical Engineering degree make you an "authority" on climate? The guy who runs the IPCC is a railroad engineer. According to your epistemology, that makes him unqualified to determine anything about climate, doesn't it?

BTW, I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering, numskull.

The IPCC didn't create the IPCC. They have no obligation to you. You are not educated enough to even understand what they do.

Does the IPCC have any obligations of any kind? How about to tell the truth?

I'm educated enough to know a con when I see one. Changing your story every time the facts change is the sure sign of a con, and following such cons is the sure sign of a sucker.

If you understood science, an ability that you so obviously lack, you'd know that the scientific process is a never ending series of questions and answers. Conservatives love questions but find many answers oh so inconvenient. You accept what the media entertainers told you, that you are entitled to whatever truth you want.

In fact, you are only entitled to what the rest of us are. The truth.

 

[PMZ]

I feel sorry for people that don't believe in climate charge I'll pray for you.

Pray to who? Gaia?

None of us skeptics deny that the climate is changing...it is always changing. What we want to see is actual proof that man is responsible for the change...proof that doesn't exist in any form outside of a computer model which is no proof at all.

Who's Gaia?

The proof is abundant and compelling and certain. Denying it is merely conservative denial of what they find inconvenient. Being held accountable for their energy glutiny.