Muzman on 14/11/2009 at 14:16
Although that is one of those total the percentages to get a headline tricks. The largest group is still the AGW camp, the second largest by far being the "not proven" camp, which isn't outright denial.
I'd say that position in the public mind is fair enough; it's not really proven as well as a lot of other things. Most people have heard about some dissent so aren't quite as convinced. Of course, what they don't see is that following the trail on the search for alternative explanations comes up empty, leaving only outright denial. Most folks haven't gone that far. (This also means that the climate denial lobby is working, successfully spreading FUD on the whole thing).
It's funny, I remember thinking the popularity of Inconvenient Truth etc was a great watershed for the environmentalist movement. After thirty/forty years they were really getting somewhere. But struggling in obscurity seems like it'll be easier than struggling in the full force of the opposition.
CCCToad on 14/11/2009 at 15:19
The only people global warming advocates have to blame is themselves. (
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/earth-environment/article6896152.ece) This article sums it up pretty well. By making overly exaggerated and easily debunked claims, they lose faith from people.
Then you have guys like (
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2009/07/interview-with-nobel-prize-winning.html) this one. If you want convince people that global warming is a hoax, there's no better way to do it than what this guy said.
Quote:
It's a tough sell. And probably you have to find ways to exaggerate the threat. And you can in fact find ways to make the threat serious.
...
But I tend to be rather pessimistic. I sometimes wish that we could have, over the next five or ten years, a lot of horrid things happening -- you know, like tornadoes in the Midwest and so forth -- that would get people very concerned about climate change. But I don't think that's going to happen.
The movement has had an over-reliance on fear tactics, which only work for so long. I do remember quite a few predictions of global apocalypse within the next ten, twenty, or however many years. After a few dozen of these fail to come true, people stop believing in you. The environmental movement would be much more successful if they would simply stick to the science.
Mr.Duck on 14/11/2009 at 16:07
So most Brits are wankers, eh?
*Flees before they drown him in warm beer*
Starrfall on 14/11/2009 at 16:09
I'd say there's a good deal of stupidity going on that is completely independent of the fact that some of the global warming people have overstated their position. You have to be a pretty big fucking bliss-ninny to believe that we can dump thousands of pounds of garbage into the air every day with zero effect. These people probably think the giant field of garbage floating in the Pacific ocean isn't our fault either.
Anyways doesn't the midwest already get tornadoes?
Gingerbread Man on 14/11/2009 at 17:33
This is what I vaguely remember about the British Public, Lord love 'em:
Inline Image:
http://www.uelekevu.com/diana-jade-goody.jpgso...
um...
Sometimes I wonder if they agree on which direction "warmer" is, you know?
Muzman on 14/11/2009 at 17:41
Hah, surely no.
Check out that Stephen "F" quote at the bottom like a verbatim quote of something he said down the phone. Hilarious.
The artist blurb is gold too "Mintella Vienetta, creator of the best selling 'Cheeky bunny' series of racist thimbles"
demagogue on 14/11/2009 at 17:50
*shrugs* Climate Change had an international panel of 100s of scientists to shore up every loose end imaginable in the case on an official consensus basis directed precisely towards a policy response. I can't think of any other environmental issue that has that: smog, acid rain, bezene in water, POPs, over-fishing, ozone depletion, introduction of invasive weeds/pests -- nope.
My word, people that aren't convinced in anthropomorphic climate change must feel very good that those other environmental problems don't exist either, considering the scientific case is more grounded in the literature for climate change than it is for them.
Gingerbread Man on 14/11/2009 at 17:51
Quote Posted by Muzman
I can tell as I have seen quite a few of them in my time
Oh, there's plenty of give-away, but the concept is rock-solid. :D
Muzman on 14/11/2009 at 18:07
Indeed. I think I wished it really were true. Its a little faith breaking/death of innocence/ No Santa Claus actually
