5 ms·

What "other side"?? The only people who are questioning the science are the ones who don't have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the claims scientifically a

What "other side"?? The only people who are questioning the science are the ones who don't have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the claims scientifically and who have an economic stake in continuing fossil fuel usage. No climate scientists oppose it. I have not seen a single, reliable and useful model which goes against the fundamentals of climate change. There are no alternative hypothesis that explain the climate phenomena we're experiencing now. No has dismissed anything reflexively. It is only the years and years of ludicruous, ignorant and politically motivated arguments against climate change that have solidified that position for many of us.

DougWebb 11y ago
The only people who are questioning the science are the ones who don't have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the claims scientifically and who have an economic stake in continuing fossil fuel usage. That's dismissive: you're claiming that the people who disagree with you are only disagreeing because they're idiots who should be ignored, and/or are being paid to disagree.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  Dismissive or not, he's right that that's mostly the case. You don't see the climate science community arguing much about this issue. It's right to dismiss them.
rudolf0 11y ago
You're dismissing their claims without actually stating them or refuting them, as do many people. I believe their claims are false, but I don't dismiss them. Trying to wave away statements by alleging ulterior motives or lack of knowledge only empowers the opposition. Debate them rationally, and you'll start to change more views.
- ansible 11y ago
  Debate them rationally, and you'll start to change more views. I don't have the link handy, but not too long ago there was an interesting article about that posted to HN. Using reason doesn't actually work well with most people, most of the time. People get emotionally attached to certain ideologies. It becomes part of their core identity, much like sports team affiliation. It is often more effective to find emotional arguments instead. Show them pictures of smog in Bejing, for example. Or how the Marshal Islands are sinking under the ocean (well, the sea level is rising).
- MaysonL 11y ago
  Permafrost melting Annual Arctic ice cap melt increasing. Bird migration ranges moving poleward, migration times moving winterward. Animal and plant range moving poleward and upward. Do you have an explanation for these facts other than climate change aka global warming? If not STFU. If you do, I'd love to hear it.
  - rudolf0 11y ago
    Did you read what I wrote?
    - MaysonL 11y ago
      I was giving you facts on the ground, rather than complaints about ulterior motives or lack of knowledge, although both complaints are often valid.
gozur88 11y ago
That's exactly what I'm talking about.
Sailfish 11y ago
"The only people who are questioning the science are the ones who don't have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the claims scientifically and who have an economic stake in continuing fossil fuel usage." Wrong! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_th... Where as, Warmists have Arnold, Gore, Pope Francis, Hollywood celebs and lying pols, &c ... all eminent scientists in their own right ... NOT! And let's not forget the infamous head of the IPCC who was also NOT a climate scientist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri "No climate scientists oppose it. I have not seen a single, reliable and useful model which goes against the fundamentals of climate change. There are no alternative hypothesis that explain the climate phenomena we're experiencing now." That straw man is so obvious, I expect to see Dorthy, Tin man and the Cowardly Lion joining in anytime soon. There are no reliable or useful models which correctly defines fundamentals of climate change, period. And speaking of Dorthy, how about NOAA jiggering the satellite data (the most accurate climate date source) to erase the 18-20 global warming cessation period: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/noaa-massively-ramps-up-their-temperature-fraud-ahead-of-paris/ https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/noaa-massivel... I could go on and provide many more links bogus claims being refuted but with Warmists, it's just a waste of digital pixels.
- ossreality 11y ago
  "Warmists" Thank you! Finally, non-ironic usage of "SJW" is no longer the biggest indicator of someone who is a tool. Now it's "Warmist".

DougWebb 11y ago

The only people who are questioning the science are the ones who don't have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the claims scientifically and who have an economic stake in continuing fossil fuel usage. That's dismissive: you're claiming that the people who disagree with you are only disagreeing because they're idiots who should be ignored, and/or are being paid to disagree.

gnaritas 11y ago
Dismissive or not, he's right that that's mostly the case. You don't see the climate science community arguing much about this issue. It's right to dismiss them.

rudolf0 11y ago

You're dismissing their claims without actually stating them or refuting them, as do many people. I believe their claims are false, but I don't dismiss them. Trying to wave away statements by alleging ulterior motives or lack of knowledge only empowers the opposition. Debate them rationally, and you'll start to change more views.

ansible 11y ago
Debate them rationally, and you'll start to change more views. I don't have the link handy, but not too long ago there was an interesting article about that posted to HN. Using reason doesn't actually work well with most people, most of the time. People get emotionally attached to certain ideologies. It becomes part of their core identity, much like sports team affiliation. It is often more effective to find emotional arguments instead. Show them pictures of smog in Bejing, for example. Or how the Marshal Islands are sinking under the ocean (well, the sea level is rising).
MaysonL 11y ago
Permafrost melting Annual Arctic ice cap melt increasing. Bird migration ranges moving poleward, migration times moving winterward. Animal and plant range moving poleward and upward. Do you have an explanation for these facts other than climate change aka global warming? If not STFU. If you do, I'd love to hear it.
- rudolf0 11y ago
  Did you read what I wrote?
  - MaysonL 11y ago
    I was giving you facts on the ground, rather than complaints about ulterior motives or lack of knowledge, although both complaints are often valid.

gozur88 11y ago

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

Sailfish 11y ago

"The only people who are questioning the science are the ones who don't have the necessary knowledge to evaluate the claims scientifically and who have an economic stake in continuing fossil fuel usage." Wrong! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_th... Where as, Warmists have Arnold, Gore, Pope Francis, Hollywood celebs and lying pols, &c ... all eminent scientists in their own right ... NOT! And let's not forget the infamous head of the IPCC who was also NOT a climate scientist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri "No climate scientists oppose it. I have not seen a single, reliable and useful model which goes against the fundamentals of climate change. There are no alternative hypothesis that explain the climate phenomena we're experiencing now." That straw man is so obvious, I expect to see Dorthy, Tin man and the Cowardly Lion joining in anytime soon. There are no reliable or useful models which correctly defines fundamentals of climate change, period. And speaking of Dorthy, how about NOAA jiggering the satellite data (the most accurate climate date source) to erase the 18-20 global warming cessation period: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/noaa-massively-ramps-up-their-temperature-fraud-ahead-of-paris/ https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/noaa-massivel... I could go on and provide many more links bogus claims being refuted but with Warmists, it's just a waste of digital pixels.

ossreality 11y ago
"Warmists" Thank you! Finally, non-ironic usage of "SJW" is no longer the biggest indicator of someone who is a tool. Now it's "Warmist".