3 ms·

> The report defined climate deniers as those who say that the climate crisis is not real or not primarily caused by humans, or claim that climate science is no

> The report defined climate deniers as those who say that the climate crisis is not real or not primarily caused by humans, or claim that climate science is not settled, that extreme weather is not caused by global warming or that planet-warming pollution is beneficial. A narrower definition may be more productive.

ceejayoz 2y ago
The narrow definitions lead to the tentacles like “CO2 is good, actually!” as deniers find things becoming untenably silly to espouse.
- spacebanana7 2y ago
  Narrower definitions help target the debate. Debating climate change proponents or fatalists about the existence of climate change is a waste of everybody's time, since it's something they already agree with.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    > Narrower definitions help target the debate. They also make it like trying to squeeze clay in your fist. Little bits squirt out everywhere and make a mess. > Debating climate change proponents or fatalists about the existence of climate change is a waste of everybody's time, since it's something they already agree with. Only very recently, and immediately moved on to the next incremental level of unscientific bullshit objections they'll espouse for another decade.
polski-g 2y ago
The IPCC report itself says they extreme weather is not caused by climate change, and that the warming of the planet can be useful.
- tpush 2y ago
  Source, please.
somedude895 2y ago
> extreme weather is not caused by global warming Even just this single one is too broad. There've been more than a few extreme weather events where I live this summer. Each time the media uses those to push for more climate action, even though the data shows that there have been many years just like this in the past few decades. Would this year have seen fewer of these weather events if it weren't for climate change? Nobody knows. Does pointing this out make me a climate change denier? To some, I suppose. Certainly to those who put that label on anyone who doesn't believe it's the most pressing issue at this moment, or doesn't believe in the same solutions as they do.

ceejayoz 2y ago

The narrow definitions lead to the tentacles like “CO2 is good, actually!” as deniers find things becoming untenably silly to espouse.

spacebanana7 2y ago
Narrower definitions help target the debate. Debating climate change proponents or fatalists about the existence of climate change is a waste of everybody's time, since it's something they already agree with.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  > Narrower definitions help target the debate. They also make it like trying to squeeze clay in your fist. Little bits squirt out everywhere and make a mess. > Debating climate change proponents or fatalists about the existence of climate change is a waste of everybody's time, since it's something they already agree with. Only very recently, and immediately moved on to the next incremental level of unscientific bullshit objections they'll espouse for another decade.

polski-g 2y ago

The IPCC report itself says they extreme weather is not caused by climate change, and that the warming of the planet can be useful.

tpush 2y ago
Source, please.

somedude895 2y ago

> extreme weather is not caused by global warming Even just this single one is too broad. There've been more than a few extreme weather events where I live this summer. Each time the media uses those to push for more climate action, even though the data shows that there have been many years just like this in the past few decades. Would this year have seen fewer of these weather events if it weren't for climate change? Nobody knows. Does pointing this out make me a climate change denier? To some, I suppose. Certainly to those who put that label on anyone who doesn't believe it's the most pressing issue at this moment, or doesn't believe in the same solutions as they do.