4 ms·

FWIW, I'm not sure if any main stream politicians are arguing today that there is no climate change. I could be wrong, but most of what I hear is a question of

FWIW, I'm not sure if any main stream politicians are arguing today that there is no climate change. I could be wrong, but most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated, rather than whether it's happening at all. There are some obvious exceptions like people pandering with "record low today, how about that global warming libs", but as far as I can tell this isn't the official position of any political office.

jandrese 5y ago
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/climate-deniers-117th-congress/ https://www.americanprogress.org/article/climate-deniers-117... Climate Change denial is alive and well in the US. In some areas it is considered a political liability to acknowledge climate change.
cryptoz 5y ago
"FWIW", the last president declared that climate change was a hoax invented by China to make the US weaker. I don't know about "official position of any political office" but "climate change is a hoax" (or similar) is a common position on one half of the US political divide.
- mmmpop 5y ago
  You can say his name, it's not like we're going to cause him to appear if we say his name 3 times.
  - mhh__ 5y ago
    You do tend to get Downvoted when you say it. Depending on the thread I think it's either people annoyed that they're seeing his name at all, and people who don't like seeing their guy getting criticized, but either way the result is the same. HN does generally swing much righter than the rest of the internet, too.
  - mmmpop 5y ago
    - ska 5y ago
      Perhaps the down votes were just because you called someone out for a perfectly fine phrasing? Referring to him differently wouldn't add any value.
      - mmmpop 5y ago
        ska 5y ago
        If the poster has said "he-who-will-not-be-named", I'd be there right with you and say it was silly. But they just did not do that, that is something you have made happen in your head. "former president" is perfectly fine. As is "last president", or "trump", or whatever. I think the point wasn't about the specific person who had said those things so much about general level of political discourse in US around this subject...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- dylan604 5y ago
  I'm still a big fan of making all elected officials wear NASCAR inspired suits with the patches of all of their corporate sponsors so we know who's actually talking when the elected person's mouth moves.
- distrill 5y ago
  Yes, that's an example of the obvious pandering that I left room for.
mmmpop 5y ago
>> most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated, rather than whether it's happening at all. I feel like that's last decade's news. Many people I hear now are just fed up of the hypocrites and would as soon watch it all melt/burn/explode rather than let smug folk like Kerry be the "Climate Czar" while tooling around the globe on his Airstream. Greta has a point when she starts raving about the climate change conferences where each of the attendees all flew in on their private jets. It's pretty shameful.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  What were the going to do travel by sailboat for weeks? Some of the most important/powerful people in the world? They aren't used to zoom so flying it is.
  - mmmpop 5y ago
mikestew 5y ago
but most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated That's just another form of denialism. "Climate change is a hoax, I don't have to change my behavior." is little different from "Climate change is real, but I'm not convinced it human-caused, so I don't have to change my behavior."
- asoneth 5y ago
  I suspect the next stage will be to admit that it's real and was caused by humans, but argue that it's too late/expensive to do anything about it. (And therefore I don't have to change my behavior.)

jandrese 5y ago

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/climate-deniers-117th-congress/ https://www.americanprogress.org/article/climate-deniers-117... Climate Change denial is alive and well in the US. In some areas it is considered a political liability to acknowledge climate change.

cryptoz 5y ago

"FWIW", the last president declared that climate change was a hoax invented by China to make the US weaker. I don't know about "official position of any political office" but "climate change is a hoax" (or similar) is a common position on one half of the US political divide.

mmmpop 5y ago
You can say his name, it's not like we're going to cause him to appear if we say his name 3 times.
- mhh__ 5y ago
  You do tend to get Downvoted when you say it. Depending on the thread I think it's either people annoyed that they're seeing his name at all, and people who don't like seeing their guy getting criticized, but either way the result is the same. HN does generally swing much righter than the rest of the internet, too.
- mmmpop 5y ago
  - ska 5y ago
    Perhaps the down votes were just because you called someone out for a perfectly fine phrasing? Referring to him differently wouldn't add any value.
    - mmmpop 5y ago
      - ska 5y ago
        If the poster has said "he-who-will-not-be-named", I'd be there right with you and say it was silly. But they just did not do that, that is something you have made happen in your head. "former president" is perfectly fine. As is "last president", or "trump", or whatever. I think the point wasn't about the specific person who had said those things so much about general level of political discourse in US around this subject...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
dylan604 5y ago
I'm still a big fan of making all elected officials wear NASCAR inspired suits with the patches of all of their corporate sponsors so we know who's actually talking when the elected person's mouth moves.
distrill 5y ago
Yes, that's an example of the obvious pandering that I left room for.

mmmpop 5y ago

>> most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated, rather than whether it's happening at all. I feel like that's last decade's news. Many people I hear now are just fed up of the hypocrites and would as soon watch it all melt/burn/explode rather than let smug folk like Kerry be the "Climate Czar" while tooling around the globe on his Airstream. Greta has a point when she starts raving about the climate change conferences where each of the attendees all flew in on their private jets. It's pretty shameful.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
stjohnswarts 5y ago
What were the going to do travel by sailboat for weeks? Some of the most important/powerful people in the world? They aren't used to zoom so flying it is.
- mmmpop 5y ago

mikestew 5y ago

but most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated That's just another form of denialism. "Climate change is a hoax, I don't have to change my behavior." is little different from "Climate change is real, but I'm not convinced it human-caused, so I don't have to change my behavior."

asoneth 5y ago
I suspect the next stage will be to admit that it's real and was caused by humans, but argue that it's too late/expensive to do anything about it. (And therefore I don't have to change my behavior.)