Thread: Climate Change and our Land of Fire, Flood and Drought.

Originally Posted by trout1105

Linking climate change to Australia's bushfires 'is insulting': Kenny

Typical News Corp denialist propaganda. What's insulting is when Australia is burning, people are terrified, dying and losing their homes and properties, and people with an ideological obsession like Kenny deny there is anything wrong, his words are insulting to every fire victim by saying their sufferings are nothing special.
I'm starting to compare climate change denialists like Kenny to Flat Earth believers and anti-vaxxers, who deny all the evidence before them simply because their inflated egos mean they refuse to admit they are wrong. Just dumb! They should just be regarded as crackpots and ignored, I think.
My opinion.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

I'm starting to compare climate change denialists like Kenny to Flat Earth believers and anti-vaxxers, who deny all the evidence before them simply because their inflated egos mean they refuse to admit they are wrong. Just dumb! They should just be regarded as crackpots and ignored, I think.
My opinion.

There have been countless things considered facts to later be known to be false.
To have a closed mind is to comply.

I'm starting to compare climate change denialists like Kenny to Flat Earth believers and anti-vaxxers, who deny all the evidence before them simply because their inflated egos mean they refuse to admit they are wrong. Just dumb! They should just be regarded as crackpots and ignored, I think.

The Exact same can be said about the climate activists/zealots.
Political "point scoring" and media sensationalising to sell newspapers/push agendas using other peoples misery and loss is a Very LOW act indeed.

The denialists are not scientific, they're just recycling propaganda and denying the science, same as Flat Earthers and anti-vaxxers.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

The denialists are not scientific, they're just recycling propaganda and denying the science, same as Flat Earthers and anti-vaxxers.

Neither are the Doomers.

Doomers search only for information that supports their hypothesis, never pausing to question any of the information for its source, accuracy or its integrity.

There is admitted evidence of inaccuracies in previous data collection, data sources and methodology used.

Data clusters are at times questionable, and periods of reference often skewed to produce a specific outcome.

FEs and AVs are a different league, basing only on conspiracy theories and nothing else (absolutely no data out there at all can even produce a remotely plausible theory in line with their belief).

Denialist is an inaccurate term, often used to describe anyone who doesn’t blindly follow the masses. Reality is there are some who outright deny any change. There are also many who simply question the “extreme” of the predictions. And there are many who question the actual motives behind much of the movement (follow the financials).

Plenty of examples in this thread alone make attempts to link Climate to Weather. This is obviously not correct.

There’s also multiple members of the scientific community outright saying, on record, going back over a decade, that we are unable to prevent any of this happening - and yet everything they had gone on record about has not eventuated. Others to this day say it’s too late.

The recent summit - highlights - almost all discussion related to economics. Nothing about how to actually solve the issues claimed. Speaks volumes to where concern is.

Carbon pricing, carbon taxes etc will NOT fix the problem, like any economic solution all it will drive is cost increases. Like people who “carbon offset” their air travel, mains power etc... just where and how exactly do you think this happens?

We need to stop using Denialist as a term representing ignorance, as in denial is not what many here are. Many are simply questioning the data, seeking understanding.

The masses that believe it to be 100% man made need to simply look for all the data. With an open mindset and ask the question “why” or “how” at each juncture.

There are multiple climate models used globally. Not once in any modelling have they all agreed on outcomes.

Our inland sea, our continents, everything has been subject to changes and shifts in environmental influences over Millenia. Oceans have risen and subsided.
Mankind will need to adapt to changes, not maintain a status quo (as it will not happen).

If that means a city is submerged, then people will need to move - it’s happened before. After all, people moved there, they can move away.

I personally am not a denialist, I have openly acknowledged climate change is occurring. I am however cautious of the manipulative manner in which information is presented. And extremely skeptical of the key drivers behind current movements.

For the Doomers, the hypocrisy is mind blowing. If a person believes it is completely up to us to stop this carbon footprint then there is no alternative but to commit 100% to reduction. No half baked efforts. No excuses. No “But I travel as green as possible” comments.

Travel by fuelled machine is for fun, adventure (and convenience). Therefore unnecessary and not inline with an eco-mantra. There is no ecologically sound argument for ICE fuelled mechanical tourism type travel.

People need to own it. Not expect governments to, because if they mandate it - freedoms will crumble to meet the requirements. And I’ll put a carton on it nobody here is going to accept the financial burdens and loss of freedoms it will entail.

Originally Posted by Johndoe

There have been countless things considered facts to later be known to be false.
To have a closed mind is to comply.

The argument that scientists have been wrong in the past so can't be trusted now is a logical fallacy.

Not only that, but many of the examples some people like to use to illustrate that are just plain wrong.

Some people like to argue that we were told in the 70s that the earth was cooling so we can't now trust the scientists who have concluded that it is warming. It wasn't the majority of scientists making that claim in the 70s. An analysis of about 42 relevant papers published then showed that about 26 suggested that warming was likely about half a dozen suggested it was cooling and some were neutral. The media chose to highlight those who warned about cooling.

Others claim that doctors once told us smoking was safe. The truth is that most doctors said it was unhealthy while advertisers paid by the tobacco industry said it was safe. The tobacco industry had deep enough pockets to pay a small number of doctors to muddy the waters and confuse the public in exactly the same way that the fossil fuel industry is paying people to say things that confuse or distract the public.

Others insist that we were told a couple of decades ago that we were all going to die from the hole in the ozone layer. However that is an unwise example for them to use because science gave us the data that showed that there was a problem. Science offered a solution which was implemented via the Montreal Protocol. The problem was solved because unlike now, the right people listened to the science.

Science didn't tell us the Earth was flat; that was the church who tried to maintain that fiction.

Columbus wasn't criticised because everyone else thought the Earth was flat. He was criticised because he seriously underestimated the size of the globe. Scientists thought he would run out of food and water before he got to Asia. Columbus was wrong. He was lucky that he bumped into America on the way.

While the principle of questioning everything sounds attractive, I am not going to devote any of my energy to questioning whether the sun will rise tomorrow. At some stage the evidence is so overwhelming that further questioning is not a high priority.

The list goes on, so apart from being a logical fallacy, so many of the examples used to discredit scientists are just plain wrong.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

The denialists are not scientific, they're just recycling propaganda and denying the science, same as Flat Earthers and anti-vaxxers.

I don't know of Anyone that is denying that the climate IS changing as it has been for Millenia But Most people are Not convinced that it is 100% the fault of human actions or that this change can be halted/reversed by what the climate change zealot's are demanding of us.

The climate activists like to THINK that they are scientific But in reality they are just parroting what a few climate scientists (most of whom have a vested interest) are saying because 99.99999% of them haven't done the science themselves.

The way the earths population is exploding we will run out of water and food LONG before a rise of 2-3C kills us off.

Originally Posted by Tombie

Neither are the Doomers.

Doomers search only for information that supports their hypothesis, never pausing to question any of the information for its source, accuracy or its integrity.

There is admitted evidence of inaccuracies in previous data collection, data sources and methodology used.

Data clusters are at times questionable, and periods of reference often skewed to produce a specific outcome.

FEs and AVs are a different league, basing only on conspiracy theories and nothing else (absolutely no data out there at all can even produce a remotely plausible theory in line with their belief).

Denialist is an inaccurate term, often used to describe anyone who doesn’t blindly follow the masses. Reality is there are some who outright deny any change. There are also many who simply question the “extreme” of the predictions. And there are many who question the actual motives behind much of the movement (follow the financials).



Plenty of examples in this thread alone make attempts to link Climate to Weather. This is obviously not correct.

There’s also multiple members of the scientific community outright saying, on record, going back over a decade, that we are unable to prevent any of this happening - and yet everything they had gone on record about has not eventuated. Others to this day say it’s too late.

The recent summit - highlights - almost all discussion related to economics. Nothing about how to actually solve the issues claimed. Speaks volumes to where concern is.

Carbon pricing, carbon taxes etc will NOT fix the problem, like any economic solution all it will drive is cost increases. Like people who “carbon offset” their air travel, mains power etc... just where and how exactly do you think this happens?

We need to stop using Denialist as a term representing ignorance, as in denial is not what many here are. Many are simply questioning the data, seeking understanding.

The masses that believe it to be 100% man made need to simply look for all the data. With an open mindset and ask the question “why” or “how” at each juncture.

There are multiple climate models used globally. Not once in any modelling have they all agreed on outcomes.

Our inland sea, our continents, everything has been subject to changes and shifts in environmental influences over Millenia. Oceans have risen and subsided.
Mankind will need to adapt to changes, not maintain a status quo (as it will not happen).

If that means a city is submerged, then people will need to move - it’s happened before. After all, people moved there, they can move away.

I personally am not a denialist, I have openly acknowledged climate change is occurring. I am however cautious of the manipulative manner in which information is presented. And extremely skeptical of the key drivers behind current movements.

For the Doomers, the hypocrisy is mind blowing. If a person believes it is completely up to us to stop this carbon footprint then there is no alternative but to commit 100% to reduction. No half baked efforts. No excuses. No “But I travel as green as possible” comments.

Travel by fuelled machine is for fun, adventure (and convenience). Therefore unnecessary and not inline with an eco-mantra. There is no ecologically sound argument for ICE fuelled mechanical tourism type travel.

People need to own it. Not expect governments to, because if they mandate it - freedoms will crumble to meet the requirements. And I’ll put a carton on it nobody here is going to accept the financial burdens and loss of freedoms it will entail.

BRAVO!! The most reasoned and informed post I have ever seen on this topic on this forum. I wish I could keep my emotions out of it as you do, Mike.