Why does American right vehemently deny human impact on environment and climate? (generation, illegal aliens)

[RememberMee]

Originally Posted by OICU812

Even the 'sky is falling' Henny Penny's like Al Gore are screaming about this as if we are living within a global calamity, when even they claim about a tenth of a degree increase in temperature.

Do you know what scientists have determined the earth's climate past has looked like? If anything, we are colder now then in the past. We were living in a little ice-age for hundreds of years and are warming out of it, so get over yourself.

Stop posting BS creation scientists produce, hell knows where you get that crap you believe in from.

I said it many times it's not a current global warming thread. I posted a general question - why right-wingers deny that humans affect environment and therefore climate despite overwhelming scientific evidence and common sense itself? What is so special about your brain constitution that demands this sort of denial? Cognitive dissonance perhaps? When reality doesn't match preconceived ideas, to the hell with reality, right? You tell us, why your brain is so specially wired.

[RememberMee]

Originally Posted by Osito

Some people are just ignorant and think that if they ignore the problem it will go away. However, without humans, the environment would still change. Look at earth's past, it's gone from oceans to deserts to rainforests to ice ages, etc. and back again. All of this was caused naturally.

Therefore, if your house is burning you should use gas instead of water to extinguish fire? It's burning anyway. If we all would die at some point, why wait, let's do it now.

[Osito]

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Therefore, if your house is burning you should use gas instead of water to extinguish fire? It's burning anyway. If we all would die at some point, why wait, let's do it now.

[Ultor]

Quick point, it only seems vehement to zealots.

To your question, I personally believe it has to do with the post-modern pseudo-science the Left has injected into climatology.

[Creekcat]

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Relatively poor blue collar conservatives (and >50% of blue collar democrats in my estimates) deny climate change because they still waiting for Reagan' tide that would lift their boats. It's not rich vs poor, or even conservatives vs liberals. Lower classes don't want any troubles and fights, they wait for the promised economic growth that would launch them into prosperity, growth requires energy, energy comes mostly from fossils, thus man made climate change cannot happen. Simple.

I give up. You win. I cann't argue your estimates.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Green house effect is a hoax, yes/no? Burning all the fossils wouldn't affect climate at all, yes/no? Deforesting doesn't affect climate, yes/no? Melting of polar ice doesn't affect climate, yes/no. Positive feedback loops are evil liberal lies, yes/no? Answer, no sophistry please, just yes or no.

The questions are loaded, which demonstrates the weakness of your position.

The Earth is not a green-house, but green-houses work.

You can't burn all fossil fuels at once, but if you could, there would be a temporary affect on climate.

Deforesting is a natural process. Wild-fires swept all over North America burning for months and months on end. The same is known to be true for Africa and Eurasia.

Humans do not cause polar ice to melt, but the melting of polar ice is part and parcel of the glaciation process.

Not everything creates a positive feed-back loop.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Arguing belief with reason is futile. Why do you need all that sophistry to give some sort of "science" like feel to your anti scientific belief? You can believe in whatever, just don't pretend you base your belief on science or common sense for that matter.

Asking questions that science cannot answer is not Sophistry.

As for common sense....what should the Earth do during an Inter-Glacial Period?

Should temperatures on Earth decrease? Because that would be stupid...

Should temperatures on Earth remain the same? Because that would be stupid, too...

I guess you don't have the common sense to understand that during an Inter-Glacial Period temperatures increase....

...and the joke is on you, because this is the coldest period compared to the last 8 Inter-Glacial Periods.

The Sophists are the ones claiming abnormally low global temperature averages during an Inter-Glacial Period are proof of "Global Warming."

[quote=RememberMee;33506343]Don't twist. You can't design another scientific method (Google the definition) because there is only one in existence.[quote]

I didn't twist anything. You said....

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Science is a method people use to understand (and exploit too) outside world.

You have conflated The Scientific Method with Methodology.....they are not the same, and even a 7th Grader in science lab knows that.

The Out-of-Africa Theory is a great example. The Scientific Method was used, but his methodology was flawed, because it allowed his RAs to skew the data to obtain the results they wanted. Although I don't particularly like the guy, as I have said repeatedly -- in his defense -- he had no prior knowledge his RAs skewed his methodology and data.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Nonsense. We cannot do experiments on planetary climate, so replication of the results would be impossible.

Yes, you can, and if you cannot develop a methodology to do that, then that is not my problem.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

For a theory to be scientific, it must be falsifiable, i.e. there must be the ways to prove it is wrong.

Gosh, then how convenient that you cannot develop a methodology to actually test the Global Warming Hypothesis....that would spare you the embarrassment of a crushing defeat.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

If you can prove that green house effects are liberal lies....

The Earth is not a green-house. Your analogy fails. You probably believe that uranium ore deposits are the same thing as nuclear reactors.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

... and green house gases cannot possibly affect climate, publish your findings ASAP, don't waste your time on forums.

Others have already beaten me to it.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

And what would that "failed hypothesis" they used for Global warming be by any chance? Do you want to suggest that only green house gases released by volcanoes can affect global climate or that green house effect is a liberal hog wash? Make a pick.

There are numerous periods in the past where CO2 and other green-house gases were significantly higher in the past, with some estimates as much as 9,000 ppm for CO2.

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Don't forget, science is a mass wage occupation that is not limited to USA and Canada. There are dozens of countries where climate scientists reside and work. Are you suggesting that there is a global liberal plot designed to silence/buy all those scientists?

All tether-lines and leashes lead back to the UN...that's hardly independent, but then as a Left-Winger I don't expect you to understand the meaning of "independent."

Science is not immune to the Laws of Economics.

If there was anything to this, the private sector would have picked up on it long, long ago.

Originally Posted by Creekcat

As if poor people and no corporations run the liberal party.

George Soros is a pauper.

Originally Posted by It'sAutomatic

Then put your money where your mouth is and feed your kids lead.

Who said anything about eating lead?

The simple fact is that from the time colonists arrived in the Americas until 1978 when lead paint was banned, lead was used for many purposes.

We're all still here.

I grew up in an house with lead paint and lead paint on toys just as 100s of Millions of Americans did.

According to the EPA, we should all be learning disabled mutants drinking water out of ditches and flinging poo at each other.

You might want to consider the economics of the EPA's stupidity.

The EPA actually caused an expansion of the suburbs, due to the fact that its regulations on lead abatement made it too costly to refurbish or rehabilitate urban tenements, factories and warehouses. Why would spend $Millions on lead (and/or asbestos) abatement on a warehouse in the inner city, when I can build a brand new facility for less money in the suburbs.....where labor is located, since it costs too much to rehab inner-city buildings thanks to the EPA.

How ironic that EPA policies contributed to "Global Warming"...

Mircea

[GregW]

If I recall correctly God gave the universe of which Earth is a part for man to despoil however man pleases. However God did not guarantee the results would be livable.

From my point of view the current clean air and cleaner water is worth the billions we have spent over the last forty years to clean the place up. We should be encouraging China, among others, to do the same.

The international situation is NOT worth the trillions we have spent protecting our and others financial empires.

[OICU812]

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Stop posting BS creation scientists produce, hell knows where you get that crap you believe in from.

I said it many times it's not a current global warming thread. I posted a general question - why right-wingers deny that humans affect environment and therefore climate despite overwhelming scientific evidence and common sense itself? What is so special about your brain constitution that demands this sort of denial? Cognitive dissonance perhaps? When reality doesn't match preconceived ideas, to the hell with reality, right? You tell us, why your brain is so specially wired.

Dude, you have serious mental issues.

[Little-Acorn]

Originally Posted by RememberMee

Sure, if you call 99% of the climate science a pinko commie plot, if you deny common sense on top of that, if you put trust in the scientifically illiterate talk radio gurus,

Thanks for demonstrating the truth of my statements that it's the fanatics who go around calling names etc.

[jmking]

Originally Posted by GregW

If I recall correctly God gave the universe of which Earth is a part for man to despoil however man pleases. However God did not guarantee the results would be livable.

From my point of view the current clean air and cleaner water is worth the billions we have spent over the last forty years to clean the place up. We should be encouraging China, among others, to do the same.

The international situation is NOT worth the trillions we have spent protecting our and others financial empires.

I agree. The money to be made by these empires is an old business model---The Toll.