People Genuinely believe it isn't a 'thing'(35 Posts)
I am stunned by the sheer amount of people that don't believe that Climate change is real and that the world is just doing what it naturally does without any human influence.
Im shook- and speechless that people can dismiss it so candidly.
thoughts please....... so my mind doesn't cave in. TIA
MyDarling “when the vast majority interpret huge amounts of data a certain way then contrary views are normally political”
What a very odd way to view the research process. So anyone who disagrees with the majority’s interpretation of data is doing it for “political” motivations? What are you basing this opinion on?
“there is a scientific consensus on man made climate change”
Ok. I think it’s bizarre to try to reduce the complexity of climate science - rife as it is with opinion and nuance - to a percentage point, but let’s go with the idea of consensus. What IS this consensus, exactly? What is it that everyone agrees on? How much are humans impacting the climate - I’m assuming that this “consensus” has agreed on this? There’s a big difference between saying that there’s minimal impact and the effects aren’t really anything to worry about, and saying that our impact is enormous and the coastal cities will be underwater in 10 years, but both of these opinions would come under the category of “a scientific consensus on man made climate change”. I mean some of these people are influencing policy for gods sake (and you don’t get much more “political” than that) - I think they need to do a little better than “97% of us agree with something that nobody can really define.” Don’t you?
OK Hildobaggins thank you for trying to engage in dialogue. I agree it's important to have these discussions.
So instead of accusing others (as you've been doing) about 'not engaging in dialogue' and having views that are dogmatic, can I ask you to spell out please, if you wish:
--what you believe about human-influenced climate change
--what if anything you believe should happen about it both on an individual level (should we be making any changes in your opinion in our everyday lives) and on a government-based level?
I do find interesting your idea that seeing human beings as little individual 'carbon footprints' who 'spoil' the earth is a negativistic & resigned attitude. However, we human beings collectively do have a lot to answer for when it comes to our relationship with the earth on which we live. Can I ask about this too, what is your opinion on this, in terms of how we should be seeing our ability to effect change but also how we should view our collective responsibility (if you see any) for the changes that are happening in the climate (unless you don't accept that humans have anything to do with them).
I will be interested (genuinely) in hearing your answers.
Thanks for continuing the conversation.
I used to be a dyed-in-the-wool climate change advocate so I very much understand the anxiety around climate change issues and the anger at those who don’t seem to “get it”. I’ve really changed my mind in the last couple of years.
I now believe that there is no experimental data that supports the view that the climate is changing in a way that is unusual or dangerous, and that CO2 is a bit player in whatever climate change is taking plane. The earth does seem to be warming, but that’s a) probably a good thing and b) nothing that hasn’t happened before and c) as far as I can understand, not necessarily related to CO2 levels.
I really cannot see that anyone can produce clear evidence that humans are altering the climate in any significant way. I came to this conclusion after going out of my way to try to understand the sceptics’ perspective so that I could better challenge it. It quickly became clear to me that the “97% consensus” figure simply didn’t stand up to scrutiny - the methodology behind this research is terrible - but as I read and listened to more and more scientists and commentators who challenged the prevailing viewpoint that humans are responsible for climate change and that the impact will be catastrophic, I became more convinced by that this was not in fact the case.
If you’re interested, some of the people who influenced me along the way were Judith Murray, Anthony Watts, Willie Soon, Alex Epstein, Kary Mullis and Christopher Monkton. Some of these people have had their reputations trashed for speaking up against the climate change proponents. (These are not stupid people, ideologues or rich lunatics. If you spend any time listening to them you’ll see that they are eminently reasonable and present evidence in a clear, often cautious, non-emotional way.) This trashing of peoples’ reputations seems disgraceful to me, although understandable - there is now an entire industry built up around climate change research, and a great deal of money and power is at stake. Working in academia, and seeing how research careers are built, has helped me understand much more about this.
In terms of what should be done? Do as little as possible, always remember that to every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction, and for gods sake don’t trust governments when they start talking about green taxes. (How the hell can a government change the climate?? It’s absurd!). Keep using our wonderful fossil fuels - we have no choice there anyway - and be grateful for them, because without them we’d all be dead in 3 weeks, and wind power just ain’t going to cut it. Keep energy prices down. Bear in mind that developing nations desperately need access to plenty of cheap energy, and that a country’s increase in CO2 emissions correlates with childhood survival rates.
I also think we need to be a bit more positive about ourselves generally because as I said earlier, the ghastly human polluter narrative doesn’t get anyone anywhere. I hold Al Gore partly responsible for this - his movie was an absolute travesty and did a great deal of damage to people on a personal and a political level. The message is just bleak and joyless and people don’t want to hear it. I don’t feel remotely guilty for puffing out CO2 when I’m on my bike, or about putting petrol in my car, and nobody else should either.
There is a different conversation to be had about air and water pollution and plastic in the ocean, both of which seem to be difficult though not impossible problems to solve. I don’t know that much about the solutions being investigated, but I’ve no doubt that science and private enterprise will resolve these problems in the coming years. As ever, governments should keep their involvement to a minimum.
How is the earth getting warmer "probably a good thing"? In what way good? And for whom!? I really don't get this argument. Can't follow it.
For the rest, I will wait to hear what others think too and I will follow up on the links you have shared. In a nutshell, I disagree with almost everything you've written, but dialogue is always a good thing.
There are people expressing genuine concerns, it's time we listened and addressed these concerns. Rather than shutting them down with outright denial. According to what I copied and pasted below these concerns have existed for a long time.
A news article from 1912 warned that burning coal was releasing dangerous amounts of carbon dioxide into Earth's atmosphere.
The paper succinctly summed up the problem of human-caused climate change, saying that CO2 "tends to make the air a more effective blanket for the earth and to raise its temperature."
The clip has gone viral on social media.
We're still burning tons of coal, 106 years later.
would there really be so much concern about climate change IF proper infrastructure was put in place in ALL countries?
lots of places get enough water although all at once, should they not be working on capturing it and using it during times of drought.
hot sunny spots should be using solar energy vs other types of fuel.
people should not be given permission to build on the edge of rivers/lakes/ocean etc.
what i see blamed on climate change is actually often a lack of modern infrastructure and poor government spending on nonsense.
Hilbo, you have been lied to. I recommend reading the IPCC reports directly, starting with the summary for policymakers, and working through to more detail from there.
Grasslands that is a very valid point. Unfortunately I think greed is a contributing factor.
Talking about agenda, climate change scientist s are not going to want to deny something that is there life's work and livelihood. Examples of cherry picking data and even falsification have been exposed in the past
The Earth is a delicately balanced system if u over push one area it relabances at a new level. Large volcanic eruptions effect the world's temp and that has a knock on plant life and animal life. CO2 emissions have also been doing this, soon our perma frost will start to melt which will release methane which is a far worse green house gas. We are mad to think we can pump vast amounts of pollution and gases into our atmosphere without it affecting the whole system. Here is a pic showing the change in a glacier over 103 years. Yes the climate has changed in the earth's history but not at such a fast rate.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Get started »
Please login first.