11 ms·
Not believing in climate change is relevant to thinking about whether someone is likely to be a trustworthy source because not believing in c.c. means we should
by NotSammyHagar 10y ago
Not believing in climate change is relevant to thinking about whether someone is likely to be a trustworthy source because not believing in c.c. means we should be skeptical of that person's writing and conclusions. It's equivalent to believing the world is 8000 years old, or evolution doesn't exist, or jesus rode on dinosaurs.
It doesn't have anything to do with liberal or conservative. It has to do with being educated and drawing reasonable conclusions about the world.
- powertower 10y agoBeing a "climate change denier" can mean almost anything today. Such as that you believe that climate is changing not because of CO2 levels but rather due to other atmospheric gases or pollutants, or the sun's emissions, etc. Or maybe you believe that the models being used are politically driven (which is a provable fact BTW). You can still agree that there is a problem, but you just don't agree on the causes 100% or the solutions 100%. So unless you know the specifics of what this person is not agreeing with you on, it is a meaningless and non-relevant label.
- NotSammyHagar 10y agoPlease prove that the models of client change are used politically. You appear to be trying to dismiss concerns around climate change are some kind of irrelevant politically driven scheme. Asserting that it's a conspiracy, only politically driven requires some evidence. You can't dismiss it just on your whim.