4 ms·

.... and now you see their motive. "Human Action" means Government Action which means power.

by MCRed 11y ago

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
zzalpha 11y ago
Let's ignore the whole anthropogenic-or-not question. Are you saying you believe that global average temperatures aren't increasing? Or are you saying you believe they are, but we shouldn't do anything about it and just live with whatever consequences come our way? Fundamentally I just don't understand your position. If you genuinely believe global average temperatures aren't rising, well, there's not much to argue about. The evidence is in. Even the skeptics generally accept climate change is occurring, even if they don't agree about why. Holding a position that's objectively contrary to all current evidence is a position of faith rather than reason. If you accept that climate change is occurring, but that humans aren't the cause, and your argument is we should simply do nothing because OMG GOVERNMENT, well, again, there's not much to argue about. That's a fundamentally faith-based position as well, as it argues that the death and displacement of billions is better than governments empowered to offset those effects. I can't begin to even fathom that claim. It requires a distrust of government that I can't begin to comprehend... which has its irony, given it was the government that created the very medium upon which we're having this discussion. I suppose the last option is that you're just a troll, but I'll be generous and assume that's not the case and that rational discourse is, in fact, possible.
- jacobolus 11y ago
  Everyone I have ever interacted with face-to-face who takes this position on global warming was sincere, not an intentional troll. They just listen to right-wing talk radio for hours every day, and have a very bizarrely warped view of the world.
the_why_of_y 11y ago
If AGW is true and sea levels rise significantly a lot of people who currently live in densely populated coastal areas will have their property and economic opportunities destroyed by no fault of their own. For example, Wikipedia says that Bangladesh has 156 million people as of 2013, and that "most parts of Bangladesh are less than 12 m (39.4 ft) above sea level, and it is estimated that about 10% of the land would be flooded if the sea level were to rise by 1 m (3.28 ft)". Do you think millions of people will be able to migrate elsewhere, a large share of them even to other countries, without causing a lot of social conflicts? Just imagine all of those people want to immigrate to your country. What is the government going to do about that?

.... and now you see their motive. "Human Action" means Government Action which means power.

by MCRed 11y ago

.... and now you see their motive. "Human Action" means Government Action which means power.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

zzalpha 11y ago

Let's ignore the whole anthropogenic-or-not question. Are you saying you believe that global average temperatures aren't increasing? Or are you saying you believe they are, but we shouldn't do anything about it and just live with whatever consequences come our way? Fundamentally I just don't understand your position. If you genuinely believe global average temperatures aren't rising, well, there's not much to argue about. The evidence is in. Even the skeptics generally accept climate change is occurring, even if they don't agree about why. Holding a position that's objectively contrary to all current evidence is a position of faith rather than reason. If you accept that climate change is occurring, but that humans aren't the cause, and your argument is we should simply do nothing because OMG GOVERNMENT, well, again, there's not much to argue about. That's a fundamentally faith-based position as well, as it argues that the death and displacement of billions is better than governments empowered to offset those effects. I can't begin to even fathom that claim. It requires a distrust of government that I can't begin to comprehend... which has its irony, given it was the government that created the very medium upon which we're having this discussion. I suppose the last option is that you're just a troll, but I'll be generous and assume that's not the case and that rational discourse is, in fact, possible.

jacobolus 11y ago
Everyone I have ever interacted with face-to-face who takes this position on global warming was sincere, not an intentional troll. They just listen to right-wing talk radio for hours every day, and have a very bizarrely warped view of the world.

the_why_of_y 11y ago

If AGW is true and sea levels rise significantly a lot of people who currently live in densely populated coastal areas will have their property and economic opportunities destroyed by no fault of their own. For example, Wikipedia says that Bangladesh has 156 million people as of 2013, and that "most parts of Bangladesh are less than 12 m (39.4 ft) above sea level, and it is estimated that about 10% of the land would be flooded if the sea level were to rise by 1 m (3.28 ft)". Do you think millions of people will be able to migrate elsewhere, a large share of them even to other countries, without causing a lot of social conflicts? Just imagine all of those people want to immigrate to your country. What is the government going to do about that?