Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.
Article Source: Grist
So forget arguing, arguing, arguing with a tribe unmoored from reality. Start organizing, organizing, organizing the cohorts that are amenable to reality. Prepare them for when it’s their turn to take over. Time will do the rest.
Great article on why it's a waste of time to argue with global warming deniers and who global warming deniers are. It also talks about some of the other strange beliefs this cohort has. They're detached from reality and this article hits it on the head.
Who are they?
This is a cohort that has convinced itself that bike paths are a U.N. plot. And I don't mean "bike paths are a U.N. plot" in some sort of satirical, poetic-license sort of way. They really believe bike paths are a U.N. plot. They've convinced themselves that Obama is a Kenyan socialist with no birth certificate who apologizes for America and wants to fundamentally transform it into Europe, where they loll about all day on welfare, having homosexual sex while the Muslims take over. They believe in death panels and reeducation camps and giant North American mega-highways and creeping Sharia.
Relative to that backdrop, believing that climate change is a scam cooked up by scientists to get grant money and/or by liberals to create global government — a scam that has fooled every major scientific institution and most of the world's politicians — hell, that's easy.
Stubborn, ignorant people mad about their changing role in our culture.
#1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:27 PM ESTWait - I just had an epiphany.
Obamacare is bad for the environment.
(Now ducking behind the last old-growth trees for protection from the slings and arrows of outrageous coal and oil fortunes)
Obamacare is bad for the environment.
Interesting. That may go viral you know.
Stubborn, ignorant people mad about their changing role in our culture.
That can be said about people with many other "issues" too.
#2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:55 PM ESTSay more. Which people and which issues?
Hoo Boy!!! That's a can of worms...
[Mal tiptoes over to the water's edge... dips his toe in...]
If I tell you I'm a flaming liberal, does that tell you "which people" I have in mind???
Which issues?
Throw a dart at the front page...
Sorry mf, I'd like to accommodate, but I got my own article running right now, and I can't keep up with all the comments in that one... so I'll have to give you a rain check. Good luck with your seed.
MalamuteMan
If I tell you I'm a flaming liberal, does that tell you "which people" I have in mind???
Yep, say no more. Same people I have in mind. Thanks for stopping by!
mf,
Well.
There absolutely is precedence for what Mr. Roberts has to say here (see the outstanding graph in this linked article).
And he said it well. I've been coming to a similar conclusion of late. Quite tired of the arguments. That doesn't mean I'll stop posting the science - I may just refuse to engage with the rage. Anyone who wants to learn is more than welcome. The rest can argue with each other, I guess.
Great seed, and thanks very much. It's convinced me that, going forward, my time is probably better spent here.
#3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:17 PM ESTClimate science from climate scientists... What a refreshingly sensible concept!
BTW- Which floor in the LOC is yours??? ;-}
Oh yeah... Have you seen my article???
BTW- Which floor in the LOC is yours??? ;-}
The one that holds my portrait, natch ;-)
Oh yeah... Have you seen my article???
Indeed I have. Superb - and (as always) inspiring some highly interesting discussion(s). Kudos, my friend.
RP - Good links and good advice. Thanks.
Keep posting the science and let the deniers rage on, they won't quit. The rest of us have to get on with doing something about global warming while we still can.
...believing that climate change is a scam cooked up by scientists to get grant money and/or by liberals to create global government — a scam that has fooled every major scientific institution and most of the world’s politicians — hell, that’s easy.
The chances of anyone, no matter how adept or empathetic a communicator, penetrating that thicket of resentment, martyrdom, and fantasy and extracting climate sanity just strike me as … slim. This is a demographic death rattle. It just has to play out.
We need to speak to the people who will listen, no more pearls to swine. If we need to organize the youth and educate the younger generations on a continuum, than we shall do just that. Science, research, green energy, all of it will soon be the norm. The mistrust of science is going to eventaully go with the human dinosaurs.
Older white males will go as nature commands, along with their mates. Those of us who are in touch with the youngsters and what they are learning should feel encouraged - these children are challenged and they are up to it.
Grampa and Gramma, and all the scientific truths that they denied and disbelieved, well... they will someday soon be a memory and scientific proofs will reign, as they should. I just hope that we won't all have to live through environmental destruction to bring us to that point.
#4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:26 PM ESTFor full disclosure, except for the fact I'm 1/8 native American I'm essentially an aging (mid fifties) white male. But just like there are liberals in Texas (believe it or not) there are many of us that get it. And we care about the future because even when we're gone something or someone we love will still be here.
The cohort that is raging desperately against science and rationalism don't care about anything but themselves. At some point in their lives they shut down and quit growing. Sadly we have to give up on them and concentrate on our continued growth and the next generations'.
Notice how one of the concerns of the deniers and conspiracy theorists is how public and higher education are brainwashing our children? Education threatens them and their world views.
They didn't quit growing, they never grew intellectually, they just grew old. They never have seen life as the adventure it really is, both scary and beautiful. It is actually very sad, but their times will pass.
A couple of Winston Churchill quotes:
You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.
If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.
To the second I add And if soon after that you're not a progressive independent you have neither heart nor brain.
Too many experts agree that there is global warming to disagree. What I don't understand is why this is necessarily looked at as a negative. I see a warmer planet as being more friendly to life. More habitable zones open to not just humans but plants and animals as well. What is the down side to this? Unless the change will be too rapid for life to adjust I can see this only in a positive light. The earth has warmed and cooled plenty of times; I believe we are overdue for a mini ice age if I remember correctly. A warmer planet is a more alive planet. The only vice I see is just how fast this change occurs; too fast and it can be an extinction event. I have had people label my opinion the "Happy Plant" theory (more growth zones, longer growth seasons, more CO2 for plants, more C02 scrubbing plants). Why is this flawed?
#5 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:49 PM ESTUnless the change will be too rapid for life to adjust I can see this only in a positive light.
That's exactly the problem - it IS changing faster than that which much of the life on this planet can cope: plankton, vegetation, dissolved CO2 concentrations, etc. The problem isn't really how warm it is, but how fast it's warming.
There may be upsides to a warmer climate, and downsides too, but I'll tell you this - if human industry keeps altering the way the Earth absorbs Solar radiation, and meddling with powers quite literally larger than ourselves, we are asking for big trouble.
Lets put the global warming argument aside; it is warming. I have heard predictions on permafrost CO2 releases and other accelerators that can kick in to augment the industrial warming. Do we have solid studies that are generally agreed upon by the majority of climatologists concerning the pace of warming? And the historical perspective of such warming? I know events beyond our control have occurred in the past (asteroid strikes, super volcanoes, extended long term magma/CO2 gas releases) that have altered our environment short term drastically and it took (ages?) to re-balance. I understand that there is even an "ice ball" theory and a "point of no return" theory which the earth reached concerning ice-reflected solar energy that resulted in covering the earth in ice (which we would still be if not for an event that released massive amounts of C02 into the atmosphere). On what scale is the threat of global warming? I have heard some pretty far fetched worse case scenarios (the film "The Day After" is a prime example). What is the general consensus on the speed of change and how this could have a historical reference we could compare it to? Most agree that the earth is warming. How fast and what will happen? Expected results vs worse case scenario theories. Because we are not creating carbon; we are just releasing trapped carbon in the form of fossil fuels; I expect there to be much much more C02 trapped under the crust then we could ever release (just the absorption/growth of our plates has to create massive amounts of C02).
Unless the change will be too rapid for life to adjust I can see this only in a positive light
That, I believe, is the problem. The change is too rapid.
too fast and it can be an extinction event
I won't go looking for supporting links right now but I've read that a major extinction event is already underway. Also I've read that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is rapidly causing ocean acidification leading to a possible collapse of ocean food chains. Humans are part of those chains so we're at great risk too.
I invite those with current links to articles on these topics to chime in here.
I won't have time to check in more today but for sure I will revisit day to day. I want to be informed on this and be able to separate fact from agendas. One bad thing with the internet is too much information and a lot of suspect info/ misinformation :) I will be able to quicken my education on this with credible sources. Thanks to all with links, it really helps.
I'm pretty sure you can trust the NRDC, and sorry, it is the National Resource Defence Counsel, my bad, very dumb. I knew it looked and sounded wrong, in a hurry.:(
Libertarian y2k and SCTexan
I hear you. There's almost too much information out there these days and it can become confusing. Still it's important to do your best to wade through it because so much is at stake. Keep an open mind and keep asking because the truth is out there.
Ambivalent
my bad, very dumb
No sweat. Please make as many mistakes as possible so it takes attention away from all the ones I make:-)
OMG! I was out back in the yard with my camera and the blue sky and the crows, and realized, for the last time: Natural Resources Defence Council. Looking horrified :(((
Time to do something that doesn't require a brain....
The global warming mantra would have had a much better chance of success if it had started in the 1950's. That way, it would have been a full 60 years to indoctrinate the youth, with plenty of room for government to grow.
The EU is on the verge of fiscal collapse, and we'll soon follow. When governments fail, people have little time to concern themselves with whether the ocean has crept onto their shores by another millimeter, or some dataset somewhere tells of "record" whatever.
So the AGW movement is poorly timed, since other far more sinister things will take hold in the citizen's mind in the short years to come.
#6 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 4:37 PM ESTpeople have little time to concern themselves with whether the ocean has crept onto their shores by another millimeter, or some dataset somewhere tells of "record" whatever.
It's about a little more than that. When food chains start to collapse citizen's will be sorry all they paid attention to was economic boogie men myths.
A great many people believe that one of the primary barriers to action on climate change is the existence of a cadre of “climate deniers” — people who refuse to accept the now-overwhelming scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change. There is a great deal of tortured introspection among people in my circles about how to reach the deniers and bring them around to reality. (Seriously. You should see some of the email threads.)
Over time, I have come to disagree. I don’t think the climate deniers will ever change their minds. What will happen is that they will, to put it bluntly, die off. We might wish it otherwise, but I fear that change on climate — real change, non-linear change — will not happen until the generational cohort in which climate denialism is concentrated begins passing into the sweet beyond.
Of course of the climate deniers hold things up for too long, then we may be past the point of taking any action that would do us much good. Climate deniers are very much a threat to the welfare of our planet. Maybe a miracle will happen and some of them will open their mind a little. We can always hope.
Great seed!
#7 - Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:02 PM ESTClipped to the Climate Change - Human Caused group too. :)
Maybe a miracle will happen and some of them will open their mind a little.
McSpocky - I think it will take a miracle considering some of the conversations I have with them (and I'm sure you've had those too). Thanks for stopping by!
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Log In | Register
