Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
4 days ago.
by mythravere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Tiredofit

I don't deny anything, the arrogant attitude you project does not help your cause, as one who used to doubt, like a reformed drunk, everyone must agree with your current opinion. I doubt, not deny. This thing is being used by many different people for thier own agendas.

Posted 356 days ago.

mythravere

So yea no wonder you can't reason with the people who deny climate change!

For them its an existential battle of biblical proportions etc. Cue dramatic music.

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

But then you get into issues of logic. Like for example. This is the greatest country in the world. Ok. Coolbeans. Then the same people that have said that turn around and cry that this nation is falling apart and is on the brink of collapse.

HUH? We clearly can't be the greatest if we are failing....right?

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

Another selection from the article.

"Basically, group narcissists (people who agreed with statements like "If America ruled the world it would be a better place" and "America is the best country in the world") were more likely to express negative attitudes about immigrants, as measured by a survey. Interestingly, people with strong in-group identification but low levels of group narcissism did not hold particularly negative attitudes."

I have seen this time and again on here. If not in this pressing need to constantly reaffirm the greatness of this country. Then its seen in the need to express their devotion to god by having it constantly reaffirmed in all aspects of their life with no regard to the beliefs or non-belief of others.

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

We got three major issues that to a rightwinger is perceived as a threat to them.

Immigrants!

Homosexuals!

Climate Change!

The supporters of those issues are perceived as being outside the "group" ergo they are a threat to those in the "group".

This why they act with such vehemence toward those issues. Add in the group think that is prevalent in all groups and you get one forceful and unreasonable/uncompromising lot of people.

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

Up until a few hours ago I have been at a loss in finding a proper term or manner in which the actions of the right can easily be explained.

I have finally found the term.

Patriotic Narcissism!

From the article this jumped out at me.

"Narcissism is characterized by not only high self-esteem, but the need to constantly feed that self-esteem with the admiration and praise of others."

"Group narcissism leads to feelings of superiority and entitlement, as well as the need for praise for the collective group, not just on a personal level. It's also associated with hostility toward other groups when that superiority seems threatened."

Posted 357 days ago.

harryanderson

And here’s an opinion. James Pethokoukis, a columnist-blogger for the conservative American Enterprise Institute, wrote.

‘There’s nothing “conservative” about making an all-or-nothing bet that climate science is completely wrong. That approach also puts GOPers deeply on the wrong political side of yet another issue, particularly with younger voters. A recent Pew Research poll found 65% of Americans see global warming as a very serious problem or somewhat serious problem. And while 28% of voters over age 65 accept the scientific consensus that carbon emissions are warming the Earth, nearly 50% of those under 50 accept it.’

ww w.aei-ideas****/2013/05/time-for-the-gop-to-take-the-lead-on-climate-change/

Like many other Republicans, I share that opinion.

If I were a Democrat, I would rejoice at seeing Republicans marginalize themselves by refusing to admit the facts.

Posted 357 days ago.

harryanderson

“You don't want to find it as it is an opinion that differs from your religion of Global Warming and Govt control.”

Opinions vary from person to person. Data doesn’t.

Now for some data reported yesterday.

“Worldwide, 2012 was among the 10 warmest years on record according to the 2012 State of the Climate report released online today by the American Meteorological Society (AMS).”

“It provides a detailed update on global climate indicators, notable weather events, and other data collected by environmental monitoring stations and instruments on land, sea, ice, and sky.”

Interested parties need not google the source of these quotes. They may be found at:

ww w.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2013/20130806_stateoftheclimate.html

Unlike opinions, data is measurable.

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

Don't be lazy or obtuse Myth, it took me all of 2 minutes to find it, I don't care to do your research for you. You don't want to find it as it is an opinion that differs from your religion of Global Warming and Govt control.

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

I used to deny climate change was caused by man. I was and still am afraid of what it will do to our economy in dealing with the issue. I am skeptical whether or not we can even make a difference at this time.

Failing to plan for the possible negatives coming from climate change will hurt us.

Who is to blame for making it impossible to have an adult conversation on the issue?

Both sides! But more so the right and its corporate handlers because of the doubt they have injected into the discussion. And because they choose to link it with the ideology of socialism. Thats done nothing but stir up the right into a hissy fit that has lead to irrational conclusions being drawn about the issue. On purpose!

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

Again sources! I googled your post talking about the petition and couldn't find any reputable references to it.

Who started that petition? Are all the signers of that petition willing participants in the petition drive?

I wouldn't put it past the deniers to fabricate a fake petition to bolster their cases against the issue.

One other thing thats interesting is the issue of being able to admit when one is in error.

Can those who deny climate change is manmade admit they are wrong when as time goes by the proof will stack up against them?

Me thinks their pride will prevent that in totality.

Got something to do with staying the course....

No real debate is possible when one side will not and can not concede when the other party is right on the facts.

Its denied just for the simple reason that it is viewed as a leftwing cause.

That is straight up dishonesty right there.

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

There are thousands of emals available for you to Google via FOIA. I know you won't bother as YOU are the one that everyone thinks like you. The thousands of PhD scientists that signed that letter are morons compared to you myth, dismiss them

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

Tiredofit if I told you were about to sit in bird crap you wouldn't believe me would you?

Because why! Yep! SOCIALISM! LOL!

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

Coming at the issue from a different angle lets consider this.

The life blood of our world. Carbon based energy sources. A resource that will become less and less plentiful as time goes by and become more expensive.

Moving away from relying on it is bad why? Even though we have proven reserves.

Why not commit to the necessary changes now seeing as how it make take years to make them workable? Its one of those things that its better to bite the bullet and take care of now than wait till the we are on the brink.

No you say? I understand.

Because SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Politics gotta love it.

Posted 357 days ago.

mythravere

Sources? LOL!

Aaah it doesn't matter. Its been debunked already.

What is so hard to understand about massive amounts of sequestered carbon being reintroduced into the atmosphere causing the chemical makeup of the atmosphere to change thereby leading to changes in atmosphere that causes (over a period of time)the climate to shift from its seasonal norms?

As I mentioned its all about who supports what.

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

* As of August 2011, 9,029 Ph.D. scientists including 3,805 atmospheric, earth, or environmental scientists have signed a petition stating:   There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

Mike [Michael E. Mann‡],   This is truly awful. GRL [Geophysical Research Letters] has gone downhill rapidly in recent years. I think the decline began before Saiers. I have had some unhelpful dealings with him recently with regard to a paper Sarah and I have on glaciers it was well received by the referees, and so is in the publication pipeline. However, I got the impression that Saiers was trying to keep it from being published.

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

writing, "I know there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards 'apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data' but in reality the situation is not quite so simple. … I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago. I do not believe that global mean annual temperatures have simply cooled progressively over thousands of years as Mike [Mann] appears to … and I contend that that there is strong evidence for major changes in climate over the Holocene [11,000 years ago to present] that require explanation and that could represent part of the current or future background variability of our climate."[132]

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

• proposing to conduct an "honest" study about the "uncertainties" of proxies and then to "publish, retire, and don't leave a forwarding address," because "what I almost think I know to be the case, the results of this study will show" that we "honestly know f**k-all" (i.e., little or nothing[130]) about Northern Hemisphere temperature variability over periods of more than a hundred years.[131]

Posted 357 days ago.

Tiredofit

* In 2009, an unknown individual(s) released more than 1,000 emails (many dealing with proxy studies) from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU). The materials were authored by some of the world's leading climate scientists and accompanied by the following note:

Posted 357 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or