Why is The Right (seemingly) so Anti-Climate Change?

[Sheik Yerbouti]

what I don't get is why the fuck don't you want to treat a planet with a fragile eco-system with respect? Mercury in fish? Traces of pollutants found in the Arctic circle...
Ahh fuck it, go ahead and dump your old CRT in the local pond, no worries. Go ahead and use lead based paints again, I am sure there are some scientists and doctors who disagree with the findings.
Fuck, they had doctors saying that smoking wasn't bad for you in a court of law. Damn right those doctors have an agenda, in fact I bet one of their nice boats is called "For My Agenda"

Just treat the earth with some respect. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You clear cut a forest that nature used as a wind buffer, a home for indigineous species, a root structure that helped prevent landslides, you're gonna reap the rewards of your idiotic behavior.
It's like when a jogger is attacked in the mountains by a puma, and some fuckwit blames the puma for acting like a carnivore, you're jogging on it's turf. You lose. And if you don't think the damage we're doing to the reefs won't have an impact, just wait.
Or just dump those barrels of sludge right there in the middle of the GBR.
idiots.

 

[blackangst1]

Yup, we can't trust scientists. In fact, we can't trust anything, because it's all a big left wing conspiracy. They control the vertical. They control the horizontal. We don't truly "know" anything. What is a man to do in this state of affairs but retreat into sollipsism.

- wolf

Where have you been the last 12 months? Wiki MMGW issues...whistleblower scientists calling bullshit on "reports"...more scientists questioning MMGW...have you not caught ANY of it? Really?

 

[PokerGuy]

I don't want to marginalize those who disagree. I want those who disagree to debate those in the majority, and I want that debate to occur within the scientific community. What I don't want is for people to amplify the level and quantity of disagreement to create a false impression that there isn't, at the present time, a large consensus, because there is. I don't think the skeptical scientists are kooky or that their views should be discounted. I think that the people who know nothing of the science and are championing their views are, however, kooky. The kooks here aren't the scientists - it is everyone outside of science who is politicizing the issue, and that includes some people on the left who are taking the most catastropic predictions about warming and misrepresenting those as being mainstream predictions. Let's keep our political kookiness out of the science, and let them debate and discuss it, but lets not pretend that this issue is as controversial in the scientific community as it seems to be among us, because it just isn't.

- wolf

It's too late for that. The issue isn't about science anymore and never will be. Why do you suppose those scientists fudged the data to make it agree with their conclusions? The genie will not go back into the bottle, the eco-nuts hitched their wagon to MMGW to push their agenda, and in doing so have forever tainted the issue and moved it to a political/ideological battle instead of a scientific analysis.

 

[blackangst1]

what I don't get is why the fuck don't you want to treat a planet with a fragile eco-system with respect? Mercury in fish? Traces of pollutants found in the Arctic circle...
Ahh fuck it, go ahead and dump your old CRT in the local pond, no worries. Go ahead and use lead based paints again, I am sure there are some scientists and doctors who disagree with the findings.
Fuck, they had doctors saying that smoking wasn't bad for you in a court of law. Damn right those doctors have an agenda, in fact I bet one of their nice boats is called "For My Agenda"

Just treat the earth with some respect. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You clear cut a forest that nature used as a wind buffer, a home for indigineous species, a root structure that helped prevent landslides, you're gonna reap the rewards of your idiotic behavior.
It's like when a jogger is attacked in the mountains by a puma, and some fuckwit blames the puma for acting like a carnivore, you're jogging on it's turf. You lose. And if you don't think the damage we're doing to the reefs won't have an impact, just wait.
Or just dump those barrels of sludge right there in the middle of the GBR.
idiots.

Not saying you dont have points, but fragile is the last word I would to describe the earth's eco system. Ever watch "Life After Man"? And actually pay attention to the science behind it?

 

[PokerGuy]

what I don't get is why the **** don't you want to treat a planet with a fragile eco-system with respect?

Nobody is against treating the environment better, reducing pollution, cleaning things up. The problem is three-fold. First, it isn't even clear that MMGW exists. Second, even if it does exist, nobody is sure what the right solutions might be. Third, the issue has become political and the eco-nuts just want to push a big government leftist agenda, which means any legitimate ideas on solving possible problems are now dead in the water (pun).

 

[monovillage]

William Connolley and wikipedia and AGW.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/22/william-connolley-and-wikipedia-turborevisionism/

While wikipedia is a decent source for non controversial subjects, as soon as politics enter into it their reliability goes out the door.

 

[Deeko]

what I don't get is why the fuck don't you want to treat a planet with a fragile eco-system with respect? Mercury in fish? Traces of pollutants found in the Arctic circle...
Ahh fuck it, go ahead and dump your old CRT in the local pond, no worries. Go ahead and use lead based paints again, I am sure there are some scientists and doctors who disagree with the findings.
Fuck, they had doctors saying that smoking wasn't bad for you in a court of law. Damn right those doctors have an agenda, in fact I bet one of their nice boats is called "For My Agenda"

Just treat the earth with some respect. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You clear cut a forest that nature used as a wind buffer, a home for indigineous species, a root structure that helped prevent landslides, you're gonna reap the rewards of your idiotic behavior.
It's like when a jogger is attacked in the mountains by a puma, and some fuckwit blames the puma for acting like a carnivore, you're jogging on it's turf. You lose. And if you don't think the damage we're doing to the reefs won't have an impact, just wait.
Or just dump those barrels of sludge right there in the middle of the GBR.
idiots.

Fragile??? hahaha - the Earth is anything but fragile. As I posted above - even if we DID do something that killed off a large part of life on Earth - the ecosystem would adapt, and survive.

In fact, you almost posted my response for me - the Earth's ecosystem isn't fragile, WE are. If we do things that hurt US - that's our own fault...but don't try to frame it as some Knight of Gaia bullshit.

 

[sapiens74]

MY problem is that we know we are polluting and overfishing, overusing resources and should dedicated ourselves to stopping that.

Those things we know for sure. THe climate change thing may or may not be our fault and if it is its kinda too late anyways

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Fragile??? hahaha - the Earth is anything but fragile. As I posted above - even if we DID do something that killed off a large part of life on Earth - the ecosystem would adapt, and survive.

In fact, you almost posted my response for me - the Earth's ecosystem isn't fragile, WE are. If we do things that hurt US - that's our own fault...but don't try to frame it as some Knight of Gaia bullshit.

We're fragile? Nah, we're bipedal cockroaches sans an exoskeletal structure. The eco-system is fragile, and we've proved it very clearly, especially in the reefs.
But you're right. It's for our own good to do what we're doing. We're fragile little animals with minimal survival skills.You must have snacked on a few paint chips yourself.

 

[woolfe9999]

Where have you been the last 12 months? Wiki MMGW issues...whistleblower scientists calling bullshit on "reports"...more scientists questioning MMGW...have you not caught ANY of it? Really?

My response to this is the same as my response to last 4 criticisms of Wiki. The sources are there. You can critique the sources. You can quote Limbaugh if you want. I don't care if it is Limbaugh or Wiki. It is the information that is being relied that is of interest.

So I guess what I want to know is, if there are additional surveys and data regarding the overall state of scientific consensus (or lack thereof), besides the ones cited and linked from the Wiki article, where are they.

Another way of putting it is this. Various people in this thread have expressed opinions about the overall posture of the scientific community. Those statements are presently unsourced. Providing a quote from this or that skeptic is irrelevant. There are thousands of scientists studying the issue.

- wolf

 

[woolfe9999]

William Connolley and wikipedia and AGW.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/22/william-connolley-and-wikipedia-turborevisionism/

While wikipedia is a decent source for non controversial subjects, as soon as politics enter into it their reliability goes out the door.

Lots of time and energy spent trying to discredit Wiki. No information so far.

- wolf

 

[Deeko]

We're fragile? Nah, we're bipedal cockroaches sans an exoskeletal structure. The eco-system is fragile, and we've proved it very clearly, especially in the reefs.
But you're right. It's for our own good to do what we're doing. We're fragile little animals with minimal survival skills.You must have snacked on a few paint chips yourself.

I'm pretty sure you're joking at this point, because no one can truly, honestly make the response you just did.

Life on Earth will survive. Unless we physically demolish the planet death star style, it will survive much longer than we do. Will that life always look like it does now? Nope - large portions of life are destroyed on Earth from time to time, only to have very different things evolve and take prominence in the new environment.

You have to be both very cocky and very stupid to think Earth is "fragile".

 

[monovillage]

Try looking up "Climategate" on wiki. Good luck. You'll see a different title and this header.

"The neutrality of this article's title and/or subject matter is disputed."
It's one of the few AGW entries at Wikipedia that is honest enough to show it's in dispute.

Here's a small list of various climate scandals, look them up for fun.

http://www.americanparchment.com/library/climate_scandals.html

 

[GuitarDaddy]

You have to be both very cocky and very stupid to think Earth is NOT "fragile".

And you qualify on both counts

 

[Deudalus]

You have to be both very cocky and very stupid to think Earth is "fragile".

A planet the size of Mars rammed into Earth during this planet's history. That is how the moon was formed.

If you truly believe the Earth is fragile then you have issues.


Now if you wanna say a species is fragile then sure. Pandas for example struggle to live because eating Bamboo is not very healthy. But the same tree huggers that want to protect nature at all cost sure do have a problem with it running its course if that means a species might go extinct.



At the end of the day the reason some people have issues with the MMGW crowd is because:

1: The science isn't proven yet.

2: There are far more pressing issues we have to deal with.

3: The people who push for policy changes due to global warming often have other agendas.

4: The people who push for policy changes due to global warming are not very realistic when it comes to fixing problems.


I have ABSOLUTELY ZERO problem with any environmentalist that offers up cleaner energy solutions that are cost effective and that do not require people to start using less energy.

I have talked to many environmentalists who are against clean coal (they hate coal no matter what), clean diesel for cars (diesel is dirty no matter what), nuclear power (because of nuclear waste or LOL terrorism), wind power (it kills birds), geo-thermal (we might have to alter land to make it happen which can harm animals), and on and on and on down the list.

Point is if you want to find a way for humans to use the same or more energy but make it cheaper and cleaner I'm on your side.

If you tell me scrap your truck and buy a bicycle then you can go fuck yourself.

 

[Deeko]

And you qualify on both counts

Care to actually provide an actual response, or are you in the camp with the poster above that thinks if some species in reefs die out that the Earth's ecosystem is "fragile?"

 

[Jaskalas]

what I don't get is why the fuck don't you want to treat a planet with a fragile eco-system with respect? Mercury in fish? Traces of pollutants found in the Arctic circle...
Ahh fuck it, go ahead and dump your old CRT in the local pond, no worries. Go ahead and use lead based paints again, I am sure there are some scientists and doctors who disagree with the findings.
Fuck, they had doctors saying that smoking wasn't bad for you in a court of law. Damn right those doctors have an agenda, in fact I bet one of their nice boats is called "For My Agenda"

Just treat the earth with some respect. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You clear cut a forest that nature used as a wind buffer, a home for indigineous species, a root structure that helped prevent landslides, you're gonna reap the rewards of your idiotic behavior.
It's like when a jogger is attacked in the mountains by a puma, and some fuckwit blames the puma for acting like a carnivore, you're jogging on it's turf. You lose. And if you don't think the damage we're doing to the reefs won't have an impact, just wait.
Or just dump those barrels of sludge right there in the middle of the GBR.
idiots.

If only everyone had their priorities straight we'd be talking real issues such as the ones you brought up. None of which have anything to do with MMGW. Just goes to show we have more REAL important environmental issues to deal with.

 

[Darwin333]

The Right is all about personal liberty, freedom and The Constitution. All of which any means on controlling peoples behavior or productivity because of Global Warming goes very much against.

But you know, we can't have our thermometers set to 72 degrees and drive SUVs. No sir, those days are over - Barrack Hussein Obama.

Which "right" are you talking about? The ones that are in and recently in power sure as hell aren't for those things.

 

[glenn1]

what I don't get is why the fuck don't you want to treat a planet with a fragile eco-system with respect? Mercury in fish? Traces of pollutants found in the Arctic circle...
Ahh fuck it, go ahead and dump your old CRT in the local pond, no worries. Go ahead and use lead based paints again, I am sure there are some scientists and doctors who disagree with the findings.
Fuck, they had doctors saying that smoking wasn't bad for you in a court of law. Damn right those doctors have an agenda, in fact I bet one of their nice boats is called "For My Agenda"

Just treat the earth with some respect. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You clear cut a forest that nature used as a wind buffer, a home for indigineous species, a root structure that helped prevent landslides, you're gonna reap the rewards of your idiotic behavior.
It's like when a jogger is attacked in the mountains by a puma, and some fuckwit blames the puma for acting like a carnivore, you're jogging on it's turf. You lose. And if you don't think the damage we're doing to the reefs won't have an impact, just wait.
Or just dump those barrels of sludge right there in the middle of the GBR.
idiots.

Quite simply, I'd rather die from global warming than live in a world run by environmentalists and their theories about how humans are the problem and their Luddite beliefs.

 

[Patranus]

There was an ice age now there isn't. Wow, global warming.
Must of been man made

It isn't about being "anti climate change" rather the causes of climate change.

 

[JS80]

We're fragile? Nah, we're bipedal cockroaches sans an exoskeletal structure. The eco-system is fragile, and we've proved it very clearly, especially in the reefs.
But you're right. It's for our own good to do what we're doing. We're fragile little animals with minimal survival skills.You must have snacked on a few paint chips yourself.

lol we'll be all dead and the earth will survive the next asteroid hits earth. Please, feel free to off yourself and remove the carbon you emit and will emit in the future.

 

[woolfe9999]

Try looking up "Climategate" on wiki. Good luck. You'll see a different title and this header.

"The neutrality of this article's title and/or subject matter is disputed."
It's one of the few AGW entries at Wikipedia that is honest enough to show it's in dispute.

Here's a small list of various climate scandals, look them up for fun.

http://www.americanparchment.com/library/climate_scandals.html

You complaign about Wiki "cherry picking" information and you site that website? A casual perusal of the news it chooses to link and not link is quite revealing. LOL

- wolf

 

[her209]

There was an ice age now there isn't. Wow, global warming.
Must of been man made

It isn't about being "anti climate change" rather the causes of climate change.

Thanks for your help Capt. Obvious.

 

[her209]

A planet the size of Mars rammed into Earth during this planet's history. That is how the moon was formed.

Obviously the moon doesn't exist because the science on that isn't settled yet.

 

[BrownTown]

Basically because spending as much money as the liberals want to on global warming would bankrupt our entire economy and knock the USA out of the top position in the world. Of course it still wouldn't save the environment because the Chinese would take over the USAs dominant role and their CO2 releases would keep growing at an astronomical rate.