Thursday, 15 March 2018

"How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming"

I have stumbled across the Warmenists' equivalent of the the KLN blog.

I read a few just for fun, and the rebuttals of the rebuttals appear as unconvincing and self-referential as ever. I haven't found the catch all diatribe thrown at me on Facebook a couple of days ago, but it's probably in there somewhere for the Warmenists to cut and paste:

I recommend that you give up basing your opinions on this topic from a perusal of propaganda website funded by fossil fuels interests, which assumes the physical chemistry of the global carbon cycle is a hoax and then engages in complex subterfuge to keep scientifically illiterate suckers conned and supportive of the carbon profits agenda, and pick up a climate physics textbook or take a physics MOOC instead.

Repeating those memes like those of the Wattsupwiththat black propaganda site generates embarassment in the eyes of your friends, and harms their perception of your capacity for astute judgement."

That saves them the bother of addressing my actual point, I suppose.


Bayard said...

Homeys have nothing on Warmenists or Remoaners when it comes to not listening/reading and spouting the party line instead. The basic thought process seems to be: "I know you are wrong, therefore everything you say/write must be wrong, therefore there is no point listening to/reading it".

Ben Jamin' said...

I'm a bit sceptical myself, but I agree that the use of fossil fuels creates costs that need internalising. Not least to stop transferring our incomes to the Russians and Saudis.

Why can't we just all agree on a Carbon Fee and Dividend and get on with it? (cap and trade is, as predicted a failure, except for rent seekers). As it is, we are getting the worst of all worlds. As per usual.

Useless politicians.

Mark Wadsworth said...

B, if you ask a nice simple question they come back with an even more complicated answer.

I'm happy with the scientific explanations for all of this stuff - evolution, dinosaur extinction, Big Bang, how nuclear fission or fusion works - it all seems perfectly plausible and coherent (whether these things are 'true' or not and whether I actually 'understand' them on any deeper level or not) but the MMGW explanation simply does not stack up, even if you read the IPCC puff piece.

Also, there's plenty of Big Business rooting for MMGW because there's money in windmills, lithium batteries, loft insulation etc etc, so that argument is for crap.

BJ, tax on petrol, coal etc = good tax, whatever we do with the proceeds. These carbon permits and cap and trade is, as you say, a load of horseshit.