4 ms·
> Global warming skepticism has [...] everything to do with people having functioning BS detectors. To wit: [...] LOL. Notice that none of your points address
by subsection1h 8y ago
> Global warming skepticism has [...] everything to do with people having functioning BS detectors. To wit: [...]
LOL. Notice that none of your points address any specific studies. I've never met a self-identified climate change skeptic who reads the journals of the American Geophysical Union[1], like I have since the 1990s. But you people have "functioning BS detectors", "common sense", etc. -- just like all the creationists I've met.
[1] https://publications.agu.org/journals/ https://publications.agu.org/journals/
- colllectorof 8y ago>LOL. Notice that none of your points address any specific studies. It doesn't matter. The post above gives a fairly good explanation of why there are so many people skeptical either about the climate change, or about its exact rate, or about the causes, or about the policies that should be enacted in its regard. It is not very scientific in most cases, but from average person's perspective it makes sense. So the notion that every "climate denier" out there is some kind of raving mad lunatic is itself patently absurd. Their position is completely understandable, even if it's scientifically incorrect. This is especially true when you get to the "policy" side of things. As a side not, let's not pretend that climate change "believers" (denier, believer - both are horrible labels) are always rational. Most of them are only vaguely inspired by research and driven by more mundane and "social" motives. For comparison, how much zeal have you seen around colony collapse disorder? It's a serious issues with potentially grave consequences for ecology and agriculture. Almost no one cares. There is no social signalling, no in-group/out-group dynamics, no vitriol. Because it hasn't been politicized. Yet.