The psychology of climate change denial

[Jack Hays]

So you quote people using them to support positions you don't think they were talking about?

You're still missing the point. Of course the historians I cite were not writing with our present climate debate in mind. They were talking about the subjects they researched. Had it been otherwise their work would be of little value. The insights they present are available to us all in our own pursuits.

 

[istodolez]

You're still missing the point. Of course the historians I cite were not writing with our present climate debate in mind.

OK, no one thought they were writing about climate change. They WERE, however, writing about how scientific "revolutions" occur. I merely assumed you were leveraging that concept to apply to today's discussion of climate and why you felt comfortable in abandoning the consensus view of the experts.

They were talking about the subjects they researched. Had it been otherwise their work would be of little value. The insights they present are available to us all in our own pursuits.

Do you or do you NOT think that Kuhn's concept of the scientific revolution is in any way applicable to why YOU prefer to go with fringe science as opposed to what the majority of the experts say?

It seemed to me after reading all your posts and your various quotes that you felt that it was possible that climate science TODAY could be in error due to the concept of the "flock mentality" you discussed from Myrdahl and the fact that scientific revolutions overturned accepted scientific wisdom per Kuhn.

That KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY HELPS INFORM THE ACTIONS OF TODAY.

In this case the knowledge of the history of scientific theories, laws and hypotheses as they develop and are sometimes overturned.

 

[Jack Hays]

OK, no one thought they were writing about climate change. They WERE, however, writing about how scientific "revolutions" occur. I merely assumed you were leveraging that concept to apply to today's discussion of climate and why you felt comfortable in abandoning the consensus view of the experts.



Do you or do you NOT think that Kuhn's concept of the scientific revolution is in any way applicable to why YOU prefer to go with fringe science as opposed to what the majority of the experts say?

It seemed to me after reading all your posts and your various quotes that you felt that it was possible that climate science TODAY could be in error due to the concept of the "flock mentality" you discussed from Myrdahl and the fact that scientific revolutions overturned accepted scientific wisdom per Kuhn.

That KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY HELPS INFORM THE ACTIONS OF TODAY.

In this case the knowledge of the history of scientific theories, laws and hypotheses as they develop and are sometimes overturned.

Of course I think Kuhn's concept is central to my view of the climate debate. That has never been in dispute.
Of course the knowledge of history helps inform the actions of today. That has never been in dispute.
In the words of a great historian:

“The value of history is, indeed, not scientific but moral: by liberalizing the mind, by deepening the sympathies, by fortifying the will, it enables us to control, not society, but ourselves - a much more important thing; it prepares us to live more humanely in the present and to meet rather than to foretell the future.”
-- Carl L. Becker

 

[istodolez]

Of course the knowledge of history helps inform the actions of today.

So what did you mean when you said:

And btw, no, historians by and large do not study history to understand the present; they study history to understand the past.

 

[Jack Hays]

So what did you mean when you said:

Good heavens. I'll explain for the third time. Historians study the past to understand the past. We read history to add to our knowledge, deepen our wisdom and broaden our sympathy.

“The study of the past with one eye upon the present is the source of all sins and sophistries in history. It is the essence of what we mean by the word "unhistorical".”
― Herbert Butterfield, The Whig Interpretation of History

 

[istodolez]

Good heavens. I'll explain for the third time. Historians study the past to understand the past.

OK. I just like this sequence of events:

We were talking about knowledge of HISTORY to understand the PRESENT.

And btw, no, historians by and large do not study history to understand the present; they study history to understand the past.

Of course the knowledge of history helps inform the actions of today. That has never been in dispute.

 

[Jack Hays]

OK. I just like this sequence of events:

Yes. The difference is between the study of the past to produce history narratives, what historians do, and our reading those history narratives to enrich our lives and understanding.

 

[Threegoofs]

Yes. The difference is between the study of the past to produce history narratives, what historians do, and our reading those history narratives to enrich our lives and understanding.

One day, I’ll get motivation to look at Kuhn quotes, and I’m confident I’ll destroy every out of context quote you post.

But you’re not worthy.

 

[Jack Hays]

One day, I’ll get motivation to look at Kuhn quotes, and I’m confident I’ll destroy every out of context quote you post.

But you’re not worthy.

The subject is beyond you.

 

[Jack Hays]

[h=1]“The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.”[/h]
― L.P. Hartley, The Go-Between

 

[Jack Hays]

[h=1]Climate Science and the Rise and Fall of Evidence[/h]Posted on 14 Sep 20 by JOHN RIDGWAY • 4 Comments
Evident: Adjective: clearly seen or understood; obvious. Late Middle English: from Old French, or from Latin evidens, evident- ‘obvious to the eye or mind’, from e- (variant of ex- ) ‘out’ + vident, past participle of videre ‘to see’. You may recall that not so long ago I recounted for you the history of the … Continue reading →

 

[Jack Hays]

Closing Ranks Of Climate Science And Youth “Like A Big Bang”, Says Gleeful Climate Prof. John Schellnhuber
By P Gosselin on 22. September 2020

Share this...

In Berlin’s green movement, schools and officials aim to utilize youth to pave the way to a new world.

One lesson Germany loves to keep flunking: The risks of mass youth indoctrination.
Berlin daily, left-of-center Tagesspiegel here admiringly looks at the Fridays for Future movement in Berlin, a city where it is particularly strong and well-networked – and its schools serving as indoctrination farms.
Danger signals
Already some are sounding the alarms. For example in a newly released book, former FFF activist Clemens Traub comments how the FFF movement is made up mostly of privileged urban youth, most of them sporting the latest hip fashion and flashing the latest iPhone while fancying themselves as the rescuers of the planet and beholders of the truth.
Traub writes:

Within its ivory tower, the movement does not even realize that its criticism affects the lifestyle of many socially weaker people who, for financial reasons, do not always have free choice. They are branded as climate sinners because they don’t shop in organic food stores, but at discounters.
The consequence: We are all sitting on a powder keg full of social explosives.”. . .

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Closing Ranks Of Climate Science And Youth “Like A Big Bang”, Says Gleeful Climate Prof. John Schellnhuber
By P Gosselin on 22. September 2020

Share this...

In Berlin’s green movement, schools and officials aim to utilize youth to pave the way to a new world.

One lesson Germany loves to keep flunking: The risks of mass youth indoctrination.
Berlin daily, left-of-center Tagesspiegel here admiringly looks at the Fridays for Future movement in Berlin, a city where it is particularly strong and well-networked – and its schools serving as indoctrination farms.
Danger signals
Already some are sounding the alarms. For example in a newly released book, former FFF activist Clemens Traub comments how the FFF movement is made up mostly of privileged urban youth, most of them sporting the latest hip fashion and flashing the latest iPhone while fancying themselves as the rescuers of the planet and beholders of the truth.
Traub writes:

The global climate movement simply demand that the world's leading scientists should be listened to like for example these 31 American scientific socities.

"We, as leaders of major scientific organizations, write to remind you of the consensus scientific
view of climate change.
Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous
scientific research concludes that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the
primary driver. This conclusion is based on multiple independent lines of evidence and the vast
body of peer-reviewed science.
There is strong evidence that ongoing climate change is having broad negative impacts on
society, including the global economy, natural resources, and human health. For the United
States, climate change impacts include greater threats of extreme weather events, sea level rise,
and increased risk of regional water scarcity, heat waves, wildfires, and the disturbance of
biological systems. The severity of climate change impacts is increasing and is expected to
increase substantially in the coming decades.1"

https://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016climateletter6-28-16.pdf

There even federal agencies under Donald Trump have to acknolwedge the urgent need for action.

Fourth National Climate Assessment: Summary Findings

This report is an authoritative assessment of the science of climate change, with a focus on the United States. It represents the second of two volumes of the Fourth National Climate Assessment, mandated by the Global Change Research Act of 1990.

nca2018.globalchange.gov

There Fridays For Future is a global movement with over 3 000 strikes all across the world this Friday.

Fridays For Future – Map of Climate Striking and Actions

Map of climate strikes worldwide - past, current and future, by Fridays for Future and others.

fridaysforfuture.org

There people of all ages are joining the movement.

Parents around the world mobilise behind youth climate strikes

‘We owe it to our kids’: parents from 16 countries demand urgent climate action

www.theguardian.com

There companies like Google also acknowledge the urgent need for action and the great potential in renewable energy.

Discover global power and renewables insights

Market insights, webinars, whitepapers and events on Wood Mackenzie's platforms.

www.greentechmedia.com

 

[Jack Hays]

The global climate movement simply demand that the world's leading scientists should be listened to like for example these 31 American scientific socities.

"We, as leaders of major scientific organizations, write to remind you of the consensus scientific
view of climate change.
Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous
scientific research concludes that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the
primary driver. This conclusion is based on multiple independent lines of evidence and the vast
body of peer-reviewed science.
There is strong evidence that ongoing climate change is having broad negative impacts on
society, including the global economy, natural resources, and human health. For the United
States, climate change impacts include greater threats of extreme weather events, sea level rise,
and increased risk of regional water scarcity, heat waves, wildfires, and the disturbance of
biological systems. The severity of climate change impacts is increasing and is expected to
increase substantially in the coming decades.1"

https://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016climateletter6-28-16.pdf

There even federal agencies under Donald Trump have to acknolwedge the urgent need for action.

Fourth National Climate Assessment: Summary Findings

This report is an authoritative assessment of the science of climate change, with a focus on the United States. It represents the second of two volumes of the Fourth National Climate Assessment, mandated by the Global Change Research Act of 1990.

nca2018.globalchange.gov

There Fridays For Future is a global movement with over 3 000 strikes all across the world this Friday.

Fridays For Future – Map of Climate Striking and Actions

Map of climate strikes worldwide - past, current and future, by Fridays for Future and others.

fridaysforfuture.org

There people of all ages are joining the movement.

Parents around the world mobilise behind youth climate strikes

‘We owe it to our kids’: parents from 16 countries demand urgent climate action

www.theguardian.com

There companies like Google also acknowledge the urgent need for action and the great potential in renewable energy.

Discover global power and renewables insights

Market insights, webinars, whitepapers and events on Wood Mackenzie's platforms.

www.greentechmedia.com

Irrelevant.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Irrelevant.

Is it the opinion of 31 leading American scientific organizations, that Republican climate deniers have not been able to disprove the urgent need for action even with a Republican president and/or is it that Fridays for Future organize million of people all across the world that you find irrelevant? Or that companies are acknowledging the need and potential with a transition away from fossil fuels?

RE100 Members | RE100

Over 400 RE100 companies have made a commitment to go '100% renewable'.

www.there100.org

 

[longview]

Is it the opinion of 31 leading American scientific organizations, that Republican climate deniers have not been able to disprove the urgent need for action even with a Republican president and/or is it that Fridays for Future organize million of people all across the world that you find irrelevant? Or that companies are acknowledging the need and potential with a transition away from fossil fuels?

RE100 Members | RE100

Over 400 RE100 companies have made a commitment to go '100% renewable'.

www.there100.org

It is amazing that you think the opinions of these organizations matter!
We will move away from fossil fuels when the market provides a cheaper alternative
that fills the same demand.

 

[Threegoofs]

It is amazing that you think the opinions of these organizations matter!
We will move away from fossil fuels when the market provides a cheaper alternative
that fills the same demand.

What’s really amazing is that you think these opinions DONT matter.

It’s bonkers, truthfully.

 

[longview]

What’s really amazing is that you think these opinions DONT matter.

It’s bonkers, truthfully.

They would only matter, if they were supported by data!
Since they are supported only by untested hypothesis, their opinion, is weighted quite a bit less.

 

[Threegoofs]

They would only matter, if they were supported by data!
Since they are supported only by untested hypothesis, their opinion, is weighted quite a bit less.

Well...

 

[Jack Hays]

Is it the opinion of 31 leading American scientific organizations, that Republican climate deniers have not been able to disprove the urgent need for action even with a Republican president and/or is it that Fridays for Future organize million of people all across the world that you find irrelevant? Or that companies are acknowledging the need and potential with a transition away from fossil fuels?

RE100 Members | RE100

Over 400 RE100 companies have made a commitment to go '100% renewable'.

www.there100.org

In view of the lack of evidence it does not matter how many people swear they've seen the emperor's new clothes.

 

[longview]

Well...

Well what? Yes the global temperature has warmed, that is not in contention.
Was the warming from the IPCC's claimed forced imbalance of 2.29 W/m2, from all the added Greenhouse gasses since 1750,
or was some of the warming from the recovery from the aerosol dimming from the 1950's?

Science | AAAS

science.sciencemag.org

"The overall increase in the clear-sky fluxes, again estimated as an average over the slopes at the sites in Fig. 2B, is
0.68 W m-2 per year, comparable to the increase under all-sky conditions,"(~1990 to 2002 ), or 8.16 W/m2.
The fact that we ONLY saw ~.82 C of warming between 1980 and 2019, implies a much lower
ratio between energy imbalance and temperature!

 

[Threegoofs]

Well what? Yes the global temperature has warmed, that is not in contention.
Was the warming from the IPCC's claimed forced imbalance of 2.29 W/m2, from all the added Greenhouse gasses since 1750,
or was some of the warming from the recovery from the aerosol dimming from the 1950's?

Science | AAAS

science.sciencemag.org

"The overall increase in the clear-sky fluxes, again estimated as an average over the slopes at the sites in Fig. 2B, is
0.68 W m-2 per year, comparable to the increase under all-sky conditions,"(~1990 to 2002 ), or 8.16 W/m2.
The fact that we ONLY saw ~.82 C of warming between 1980 and 2019, implies a much lower
ratio between energy imbalance and temperature!

Well...

 

[longview]

Well...

So what, that the global temperature cycles up and down naturally, is still no indication that CO2 has the
claimed climate sensitivity to warrant concern.
The spike at the end of the record could just as easily be from the 8.16 W/m2 of increased Insolation
as the 2.29 W/m2 of claimed imbalance from added greenhouse gasses, or a combination of both.
Think about it, a .8 to 1C of warming from an energy imbalance of over 10 W/m2.
that would mean the numbers fed into the climate models, are completely worthless.

 

[Threegoofs]

So what, that the global temperature cycles up and down naturally, is still no indication that CO2 has the
claimed climate sensitivity to warrant concern.
The spike at the end of the record could just as easily be from the 8.16 W/m2 of increased Insolation
as the 2.29 W/m2 of claimed imbalance from added greenhouse gasses, or a combination of both.
Think about it, a .8 to 1C of warming from an energy imbalance of over 10 W/m2.
that would mean the numbers fed into the climate models, are completely worthless.

It could be...

But the only one saying that is an anonymous internet poster with zero experience in studying climate.

 

[longview]

It could be...

But the only one saying that is an anonymous internet poster with zero experience in studying climate.

With support of a peer reviewed Journal article!

Science | AAAS

science.sciencemag.org