Current Events > Is anti-climate change actually more pro-stupid than anti-climate change?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Like this seems such a fundamental and basic issue that's relatively easy to understand. If you don't want to accept it, then it almost seems like you have some very deep-seated issues with even subpar nerds. It's like the US is beyond anti-nerd to the point that they're like pro-stupid and anti-even-subpar-nerds.

Ex-Kefiroth posted...

It's because it got turned into a political issue.

Because action against climate change (or at least paying lip service to it) is generally associated with the Democratic party, that is enough to make a large contingent of the US population against it, regardless of the science.

Yes, in other words, pro-stupid.

whether or not it's man made is the issue
---

Can someone honestly tell me why everyone is on such a pedestal about climate change? I'm not anti-climate change, frankly I'm agnostic. But from my vantage point the whole field of climate science is highly politicized, has been tremendously wrong in the past, relies on computer models which have made notoriously incorrect predictions, and has been peddling doomsday scenarios for decades.

Meanwhile the other side is just as politicized, so I'm not giving that a pass either. The point is, I'm not a climate scientist- most of us aren't, I don't study this shit. I have no idea how to look at the data. I just look at the state of the field, and it's too politicized for me to frankly believe the data on either side. Yet I remain skeptical due to the track record of climate change/global warming alarmists. I don't disregard the claims of scientists, but I don't automatically believe them and think anyone who doubts these guys are idiots either.

I don't think that's stupid. And I doubt most of us who feel so superior for believing the climate change narrative has really looked at the data and evaluated it intelligently either. Maybe some have, who are more equipped, and more power to them. But you don't get to feel superior or smart for believing "most scientists" because if you've studied the history of science at all you know that most scientists can and have been wrong in the past across a wide array of fields, especially ones with as much money riding on them as climate change.

So yeah, spare me the superiority complex. Most of us don't have a clue about the climate and you're not stupid for approaching it with skepticism.
---

Yes it is

Anyone with a brain can see the truth
---

8-bit_Biceps posted...

Ex-Kefiroth posted...

It's because it got turned into a political issue.

Because action against climate change (or at least paying lip service to it) is generally associated with the Democratic party, that is enough to make a large contingent of the US population against it, regardless of the science.

Yes, in other words, pro-stupid.

Yes.
Believing something because your political party believes it is always being pro-stupid.
---

Temperatures have been rising magnitudes faster than they ever have in history, maybe it's not natural. Evolution can't keep up.

Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago | A new investigation shows the oil company understood the science before it became a public issue and spent millions to promote misinformation
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

Exxon knew of climate change in 1981, email says but it funded deniers for 27 more years
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding?CMP=share_btn_tw

Just 100 companies have been the source of more than 70% of the worlds greenhouse gas emissions since 1988, according to a new report.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

Recent studies estimate 58% of all wildlife has died since 1970.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37775622

We are in an extinction event that is ten to one-hundred times the rate of any other extinction on Earth, save the giant impact event.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

My wife's uncle is against it because coal regulations put him out of a job. So he has some bias that influences him to listen to the people who want to help him. I'm not saying he's open minded or anything, but everyone has biases.
---