6 ms·
An interesting phenomenon drowned in a clickbait article. I sometimes understand the lunatics of the "climate change is a hoax" movement.
by WA 3y ago
An interesting phenomenon drowned in a clickbait article.
I sometimes understand the lunatics of the "climate change is a hoax" movement.
- mistrial9 3y agook - but the 400 page report does not get promoted, this broadcast TV piece does..
- WA 3y agoYeah but this kind of clickbait actively destroys trust in climate science, because the lunatics think that they get sold a hoax. And actually, the kind of writing is extremely sketchy.
- psychlops 3y agoAnd it doesn't help that the lunatics are floating in a sea of hoaxes.
- jackmott42 3y agoNo, it doesn't. What destroys trust in climate science is coordinated attacks from conservative think thanks. You people who think its the fault of them not acting like perfect logicians are delusional. Its is propaganda (clickbait or otherwise) which actually makes things happen, not reasoned arguments. Conservatives understand this is and that is why they tend to win even when their goal are clearly bad.
- mrguyorama 3y agoAh yes, climate deniers just haven't been talked to right! Rather then them choosing to consume a media diet 100% filled with "liberal hoaxes THEY don't want YOU to know about!!!!!"
- oceanplexian 3y agoThere’s no such thing as climate deniers. There are people asking “Hey, maybe there are additional mechanisms in the climate that cause a hot summer that we don’t know about”? and then there are people running around with their head cut off, screaming about how air conditioning and cars and modern technology is the devil incarnate while offering no practical solutions.
- goatlover 3y agoThe media often does a sensationalist job of presenting climate change. It's always in existential terms, then social media runs with that, and you have public figures talking about how we're all doomed if we don't do something drastic in the next 5-10 years. Instead of it being a range from less severe to more severe with risk factors and tradeoffs increasing, along with possible mitigation strategies from more mundane to more risky. It becomes a binary of we're doomed or we do something drastic right now (massive degrowth, abandon capatalism, quit fossil fuel cold turkey, etc) with little in between.
- jackmott42 3y agoYou remember that time "The media" tried to communicate nuance, and it worked? The reason you don't is because you can't. People are not equipped to receive that. The real issue here is industry is destroying our planet, and you nitpick the media because you can't handle the real problem. Bike shedding.
- goatlover 3y agoThat's an extremely reductive take. Industry provides the economic activity for billions of people and our modern lifestyle. Clean energy will still be provided by industry, as will carbon capture and other mitigating solutions. What do you propose, going back to a preindustrial lifestyle? Do you have something better than we do that or we all die message that I'm criticizing? Bike shedding my ass.
- myshpa 3y ago> Industry provides the economic activity for billions of people Bullshit jobs 40-75%, transport & cars to those bullshit jobs, too much stuff produced we don't need, ... > as will carbon capture Not soon, no. Lookup how much is already in the air and how much is the technology able to capture. We'd need tens of thousands of such factories. We have the technology - we have trees. > going back to a preindustrial lifestyle Living sustainably != preindustrial lifestyle. > something better than we do that or we all die Doing what we've done before (= more of the bad stuff that got us where we are) will get us to the "we all die" part.
- tantalor 3y agoExplain how this is clickbait.
- layer8 3y agoThe climatologists aren't in actual disbelief, just in a metaphorical one. That makes it slightly click-baity.
- AmpsterMan 3y agoThey are metaphorically in disbelief, but in actuality they are not in disbelief? Yeah I guess I understand the climate deniers too. EDIT: Be cause I wrote the above in anger Scientists have been sounding the alarm for as long as I have lived. They have consistently used the most optimistic scenarios and we have constantly done worse than that. Climate Deniers want to deny because the reality is an inconvenience to their ways of life. The costs of climate denial are diffuse; they can't be directly traced back to me. The benefits are acute and wholly captured by me. Add on to this that contribution toward climate change is disproportionately done by wealthier people and you get the most powerful people, who benefit the most from climate denial, trying to get others to deny with them.
- scaramanga 3y agoFor the non-english speakers: "disbelief" has two meanings: 1. actually not believing something 2. astonishment/amazement Climatologists believe the temperature anomaly, and are astonished by it. Hope that clears up some of the confusion.
- layer8 3y ago"I can’t believe you posted that comment!" That's metaphorical. Of course I believe you posted that comment, it's right in front of my eyes.
- plorg 3y agoYou're making distinctions without differences. This kind of metaphorical speaking is very common in English and is well-understood by people not looking for pedantic argumentation. I will grant that it may be a bit subtle to non-native English speakers, but it is not being used to deceive the reader either in fact or in severity.