3 ms·

You mean there's something wrong with being skeptical? Come one...you can't say you don't believe that 'climate change' is a political bat used to beat opponent

You mean there's something wrong with being skeptical? Come one...you can't say you don't believe that 'climate change' is a political bat used to beat opponents with. Anyone who takes this topic seriously understands that the environmental problems we face today are in the 1000s. And the solution to one problem is the producer of another. Environmentalism does not equal climate change does not equal global warming does not equal planet health. This is why it is such a frustrating topic to talk about. Saying I'm skeptical about the political influences and thoughtful about the multi-variate problem means people call you a 'climate denier'. You're right - it doesn't matter how many 9's there are. I'm still going to be skeptical about this and everything else I'm told. For example, I explained my position with my sister in-law that Greta Thunberg is a child who is used by the politicians around her and that she has never had anything thoughtful to say on the subject despite her prowess in the media. Apparently, now I don't care about the environment. It's not the skeptics you need to watch out for who are capable of original thought. It's the ones who treat the term 'climate change' as their dogma and cannot handle any thoughtful debate on the issue.

crowbahr 5y ago
Skepticism is only useful inasmuch as it leads to research and action. Being skeptical of the politics around climate change? Totally rational, and digging will show bad faith actors. Being skeptical if the climate is changing? Completely irrational on the level of being skeptical if the Earth is a sphere or if Gravity will work tomorrow. A thought being original doesn't mean it's valuable: just that it's different.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ashtonkem 5y ago
> You mean there's something wrong with being skeptical? In the face of overwhelming evidence? Emphatically yes. Pursuing skepticism for the sake of skepticism results in one refusing to acknowledge reality, and often leads to people being a crank. Skepticism is a tool, not a destination. > Come one...you can't say you don't believe that 'climate change' is a political bat used to beat opponents with. My eyes rolled so hard I almost hurt myself. Do you believe that climate change is happening because of human activity; yes or no? It is a very simple question, and whining about it being a “political bat” makes me suspect your answer might be “no”. Also, it’s funny how nobody worries as much about how jobs and the economy are used as a “political bat” by the fossil fuel industries, who are being nakedly self interested. > Anyone who takes this topic seriously understands that the environmental problems we face today are in the 1000s. So? You don’t know how to fix your own car (probably) or cure yourself or all kinds of diseases; that’s what we have experts for. What is it about global warming that makes everyone decide that having thousands of experts telling them the same thing isn’t good enough? Makes you wonder if this argument isn’t made in good faith… > Environmentalism does not equal climate change does not equal global warming does not equal planet health. Completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not climate change is happening. The solutions are nuanced and complicated, yes, but this reeks of prevarication over whether or not the problem is real. > For example, I explained my position with my sister in-law that Greta Thunberg is a child who is used by the politicians around her and that she has never had anything thoughtful to say on the subject despite her prowess in the media. Apparently, now I don't care about the environment. When discussing the environment and suddenly you change the subject to Greta Thunberg, it does seem like you care about the culture war more than the subject at hand. In this forum it is extremely weird to bring her up. Personally, I don’t really give a shit about her one way or another. Climate change, is it happening? Yes or no.

crowbahr 5y ago

Skepticism is only useful inasmuch as it leads to research and action. Being skeptical of the politics around climate change? Totally rational, and digging will show bad faith actors. Being skeptical if the climate is changing? Completely irrational on the level of being skeptical if the Earth is a sphere or if Gravity will work tomorrow. A thought being original doesn't mean it's valuable: just that it's different.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ashtonkem 5y ago

> You mean there's something wrong with being skeptical? In the face of overwhelming evidence? Emphatically yes. Pursuing skepticism for the sake of skepticism results in one refusing to acknowledge reality, and often leads to people being a crank. Skepticism is a tool, not a destination. > Come one...you can't say you don't believe that 'climate change' is a political bat used to beat opponents with. My eyes rolled so hard I almost hurt myself. Do you believe that climate change is happening because of human activity; yes or no? It is a very simple question, and whining about it being a “political bat” makes me suspect your answer might be “no”. Also, it’s funny how nobody worries as much about how jobs and the economy are used as a “political bat” by the fossil fuel industries, who are being nakedly self interested. > Anyone who takes this topic seriously understands that the environmental problems we face today are in the 1000s. So? You don’t know how to fix your own car (probably) or cure yourself or all kinds of diseases; that’s what we have experts for. What is it about global warming that makes everyone decide that having thousands of experts telling them the same thing isn’t good enough? Makes you wonder if this argument isn’t made in good faith… > Environmentalism does not equal climate change does not equal global warming does not equal planet health. Completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not climate change is happening. The solutions are nuanced and complicated, yes, but this reeks of prevarication over whether or not the problem is real. > For example, I explained my position with my sister in-law that Greta Thunberg is a child who is used by the politicians around her and that she has never had anything thoughtful to say on the subject despite her prowess in the media. Apparently, now I don't care about the environment. When discussing the environment and suddenly you change the subject to Greta Thunberg, it does seem like you care about the culture war more than the subject at hand. In this forum it is extremely weird to bring her up. Personally, I don’t really give a shit about her one way or another. Climate change, is it happening? Yes or no.