6 ms·

for god sake. don't try and pass off 4chan posts as data!

nathanaldensr 9y ago
4chan may be the medium, but those charts were generated with some data. It's unfortunate the charts don't include their source; I'd love to see the underlying data/reports.
- jimjimjim 9y ago
  i used to lurk on 4chan and now absolutely believe that anything with a political angle to it is tainted. (and please tell me why weather is political in the US)
  - empath75 9y ago
    If we admit the weather is changing, we admit that we have climate change. If we admit climate change, a lot of people stand to lose a lot of money from carbon regulations.
  - krapp 9y ago
    >and please tell me why weather is political in the US Three reasons: 1) The strength of industrial and energy lobbyists, for whom climate change would mean stronger environmental regulations, which would interfere with their profitability. 2) Environmentalism (and by extension climate change, FKA "global warming") is traditionally seen as "left-wing," associated with effete liberals, tree-hugging hippies and feminism, which automatically causes the right wing to oppose it on principle. 3) Conservative Christians believe that God gave the world to humans to dominate and conquer, and climate change challenges their assumptions about the world and humanity's place in it.
    - marcoperaza 9y ago
      If you were a little more generous in understanding your opponents, you might be more effective at persuading them. There's the genuine concern that the solutions being proposed will squander our lead over our competitors, by basically redistributing wealth from developed to developing economies[1], and that the people most loudly clamoring for action also tend to be the most opposed to solutions like nuclear power, that would allow us to cut emissions without sacrificing our self-interest as much or at all. Also, you talk about the profitability of companies as if it is isolated from the prosperity of ordinary people. It's not. And higher energy prices wouldn't just affect a few companies, but just about every single industry. Environmental activists aren't helping their case when they engage in behavior and lifestyle choices perceived as whacky, and worse, try to impose them on others. People aren't going to abandon the comforts of modernity, so trying to persuade them to isn't a good strategy. [1] For example, the theory of deals like Kyoto and Paris is that developing economies can keep increasing emissions while developed ones have to immediately cut. Fair, but fairness between countries is naive. The US should do whatever it can to maintain and grow its lead over China.
      - jimjimjim 9y ago
        so based on disagreement with a treaty, people are altering their brain state to be opposed to anything associated with protecting the environment? I dislike broccoli therefore people saying we should eat fruit and veg are liars?
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        marcoperaza 9y ago
        People engage in political dishonesty to pursue their goals. It's not surprising. It's just like many well-informed feminists parroting deceiving statistics like "70 cents on the dollar" to claim that women aren't getting "equal pay for equal work" when they know it's not true. They know the disparity is largely due to choices made by individual men and women, plus the time consuming nature of child bearing, but they want government action to mandate equal outcomes. And there is a thoughtful argument to be made for such action. But they think they can better sell the idea by claiming pay discrimination. Understanding and engaging with the underlying motivations of the opinion leaders is going to be more effective than just demonizing or ridiculing the people who follow them.
        jimjimjim 9y ago
        why did you choose to mention feminists?
        marcoperaza 9y ago
        Just an example from the "other side" to illustrate my point that we should engage with the most generous understanding of our opponents' positions, if we are really interested in persuasion.
        ddw 9y ago
        Because somehow it always comes back to this
        deleted 9y ago
  - greglindahl 9y ago
    Since no one has pointed this out yet, allow me to mention that weather and climate are two different things. The average of weather over long periods of time is climate. Failing to understand this is why you see articles that claim that a single cold day in the winter means that the climate isn't heating up.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jjawssd 9y ago
Try to refute any of the arguments presented in the post.

4chan may be the medium, but those charts were generated with some data. It's unfortunate the charts don't include their source; I'd love to see the underlying data/reports.

jimjimjim 9y ago
i used to lurk on 4chan and now absolutely believe that anything with a political angle to it is tainted. (and please tell me why weather is political in the US)
- empath75 9y ago
  If we admit the weather is changing, we admit that we have climate change. If we admit climate change, a lot of people stand to lose a lot of money from carbon regulations.
- krapp 9y ago
  >and please tell me why weather is political in the US Three reasons: 1) The strength of industrial and energy lobbyists, for whom climate change would mean stronger environmental regulations, which would interfere with their profitability. 2) Environmentalism (and by extension climate change, FKA "global warming") is traditionally seen as "left-wing," associated with effete liberals, tree-hugging hippies and feminism, which automatically causes the right wing to oppose it on principle. 3) Conservative Christians believe that God gave the world to humans to dominate and conquer, and climate change challenges their assumptions about the world and humanity's place in it.
  - marcoperaza 9y ago
    If you were a little more generous in understanding your opponents, you might be more effective at persuading them. There's the genuine concern that the solutions being proposed will squander our lead over our competitors, by basically redistributing wealth from developed to developing economies[1], and that the people most loudly clamoring for action also tend to be the most opposed to solutions like nuclear power, that would allow us to cut emissions without sacrificing our self-interest as much or at all. Also, you talk about the profitability of companies as if it is isolated from the prosperity of ordinary people. It's not. And higher energy prices wouldn't just affect a few companies, but just about every single industry. Environmental activists aren't helping their case when they engage in behavior and lifestyle choices perceived as whacky, and worse, try to impose them on others. People aren't going to abandon the comforts of modernity, so trying to persuade them to isn't a good strategy. [1] For example, the theory of deals like Kyoto and Paris is that developing economies can keep increasing emissions while developed ones have to immediately cut. Fair, but fairness between countries is naive. The US should do whatever it can to maintain and grow its lead over China.
    - jimjimjim 9y ago
      so based on disagreement with a treaty, people are altering their brain state to be opposed to anything associated with protecting the environment? I dislike broccoli therefore people saying we should eat fruit and veg are liars?
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - marcoperaza 9y ago
        People engage in political dishonesty to pursue their goals. It's not surprising. It's just like many well-informed feminists parroting deceiving statistics like "70 cents on the dollar" to claim that women aren't getting "equal pay for equal work" when they know it's not true. They know the disparity is largely due to choices made by individual men and women, plus the time consuming nature of child bearing, but they want government action to mandate equal outcomes. And there is a thoughtful argument to be made for such action. But they think they can better sell the idea by claiming pay discrimination. Understanding and engaging with the underlying motivations of the opinion leaders is going to be more effective than just demonizing or ridiculing the people who follow them.
        jimjimjim 9y ago
        why did you choose to mention feminists?
        marcoperaza 9y ago
        Just an example from the "other side" to illustrate my point that we should engage with the most generous understanding of our opponents' positions, if we are really interested in persuasion.
        ddw 9y ago
        Because somehow it always comes back to this
        deleted 9y ago
- greglindahl 9y ago
  Since no one has pointed this out yet, allow me to mention that weather and climate are two different things. The average of weather over long periods of time is climate. Failing to understand this is why you see articles that claim that a single cold day in the winter means that the climate isn't heating up.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jjawssd 9y ago

Try to refute any of the arguments presented in the post.