Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Why do climate change deniers tend to be those who know the science the least.

They tend to be conservative religous republicans with little intrest or knowledge of science why is this and to be in the GOP these days climate change denial is paramount.
Climate deniers listen to experts.
Climate geniuses who talk down at everyone, listen to autistic Swedish girls who didn’t finish school..

MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout At Davos this year,Rebel News interviewed Greta. Rebel News asked her if climate change is a hoax say nothing. Greta was silent.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
Funny that I have noted exactly the opposite. Those who believe AGW are high school science types. They believe that somewhere there is an 'expert' who has. crunched all the numbers and therefore knows all the answers. Those who don't accept AGW tend to hold that experts are not to be bowed down to. A white lab coat means nothing to those who actually understand science. Science requires looking at the actual data and understanding where it fails to give an adequate picture. Take this summer where a small part of the US has hot weather therefore the entire globe is about to burn up. If you look at the average temperature across the entire US you find the numbers are well within statistical norms. Nothing to get excited about. That is the actual science not the fear pedaling we see from the clowns in the white coats.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@S33K3R You just showed your complete lack of science. Peer review is not science. It is academe/marketing. Academe is completely dependent on government subsidy and thus any study thusly is to be tossed in the trash immediately. That you think peer review means anything shows how little you actually know. That is not meant to be an insult. It is simply to point out the logical fallacy of relying on experts. Rather what do you observe. We have had a cool summer this year and lots of man made fires to frighten children and immature adults into thinking that mankind is destroying the earth. The earth had much higher CO2 levels before mankind existed (if you accept the old earth theory) than it does now. The coal beds found all over the world and the limestone found all over the world used to be CO2 Plants and animals used it in their life processes and took it out of the atmosphere. Funnily enough when the CO2 levels were in the 1500 PPM range as they were in the past the earth did not overheat. In fact it got cooler and ice ages happened. Funny how that worked and here you are worried that the earth will burn up when CO2 levels are around 400 PPM. All because you do not know science.
S33K3R · 36-40, F
@hippyjoe1955 oh it's you again. Ok thanks!
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@S33K3R Ditto unscientists ike you are plentiful and ignorant.
@MrBrownstone, who blocks me, asks
[quote]What caused the earth to cool before humans?[/quote]
The key point here is the RATE of change before humans began pumping CO2 into the atmosphere by the gigaton.

The global warming / climate change we're seeing in the last 100 or so years is MUCH different from anything measured in the glacial & sea sediment records covering the last 700,000 years. CO2 is rising 100x faster, and temps 10x faster.

"How is Today’s Warming Different from the Past?" https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming/page3.php "As the Earth moved out of ice ages over the past million years, the global temperature rose a total of 4 to 7 degrees Celsius over about 5,000 years. In the past century alone, the temperature has climbed 0.7 degrees Celsius, roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming."

How is today's CO2 increase different? https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide "The annual rate of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 60 years is about 100 times faster than previous natural increases, such as those that occurred at the end of the last ice age 11,000-17,000 years ago."

Fact is, anthropogenic global warming is accepted by a YUGE segment of the scientific community. Would you accept the consensus opinion of the American Physical Society AND the American Chemical Society? How about the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and at least 15 other national organizations of publishing scientists? See https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Global Warming vs. Climate Change
https://climate.nasa.gov/global-warming-vs-climate-change/
Graylight · 51-55, F
Climate change denial and uncertainty are more common in more rural and less prosperous regions and in countries more economically dependent on fossil fuels. The results contribute to a deeper understanding of climate change disbelief among the European population and have important implications for climate change mitigation efforts.

Rural and less prosperous regions tend to reflect lower educational achievement and a higher presence of religion.
Socioeconomic Roots of Climate Change Denial and Uncertainty among the European Population
[i]https://academic.oup.com/esr/article/38/1/153/6333558[/i]; Where Climate Change Deniers Live


CLIMATE CHANGE
According to YouGov, Indonesia and the U.S. are the countries with the highest shares of climate change deniers. In a survey carried out in July and August, 21 percent of Indonesians and 19 percent of Americans said that climate change was not real or that humans weren't responsible. While only 3 percent of Indonesians said that climate change wasn't happening at all, that number was 5 percent in the U.S. The number of outright deniers was just as high in several countries in the survey, even though they scored lower on overall climate change denial.

Other countries with high rates of deniers were Saudi Arabia and Egypt, two more countries reliant on fossil fuels for exports or use at home. India, which shares rank four, is a notable example of a country dealing with fake news and the spread of conspiracy belief lately, which could have contributed to the result.
[i]https://www.statista.com/chart/19449/countries-with-biggest-share-of-climate-change-deniers/[/i]


The More Education Republicans Have, the Less They Tend to Believe in Climate Change
[i]https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/14/upshot/climate-change-by-education.html[/i]
fanuc2013 · 51-55, F
@Graylight The climate has been changing since the beginning of time! And always will! Ask any pilot about "polar shift" that's why the FAA has to put out new aeronautical charts every few years, because magnetic north is progressively changing.
Spotpot · 41-45, M
@S33K3R Well atleast not from the Koch foundation.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@fanuc2013 Oh, proving once again that the smallest amount of knowledge can be the most dangerous thing.

Learn science. Learn analysis. Learn the topic. Then chime in. 'Cause right now, your echoing against that rock you live under.
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
What caused the earth to cool before humans?
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
@samueltyler2 In other words humans don’t cause it. Thanks.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@MrBrownstone why must you twist everything to your liking. I started by saying your statement is spurious! humans have sped up the cycle. Humans are the major cause of the speeding up and the damages being manifest today!
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@samueltyler2 The facts are the climate changes. Always has and always will. The solar output changes in earth orbit volcanoes are only three of the things that we know of that cause climate to change. What we know is that the climate is not now changing beyond statistical norms. A bit warmer one year abit cooler the next. A bit warmer on decade a bit cooler the next. However when the biggest advocates of AGW and therefore the taxes it can charge and the control it can exert AKA Canada deletes all its long term data...... Its a scam.
I know this: The sciences of climatology and meteorology are telling us about climate change 500 years from now and they can't even get a local hour to hour weather forecast right. 😂
@LoneVoice No, silly!
My refutation was invoking the law of averages!!
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@LoneVoice nope, I am just going to ignore your lunatic comments. You make your comments, never backing anything up with any sources. I post sources refuting the nonsense here. You are just not worth my efforts. Chatting with you is like trying to talk to a turnip.
@samueltyler2 Ok. Glad you're not upset. 😂
@S33K3R says [quote]right... I've read over 300 peer reviewed studies to confirm agw is a tax scam. Congrats to Bill Gates he's banked on it.[/quote]

Perhaps you could link us to, say, five such leading peer reviewed studies?

BTW, did you ever ask where does the money for climate denial come from? The US oil industry makes about $110 [i]billion[/i] per year; coal another $20 billion. Big Oil spends $3.6 billion per year on advertising; a sum equal to about 8X the whole NSF climate budget. You're not naive enough to believe [i]none[/i] of that money goes to propaganda, are you?
Graylight · 51-55, F
@ElwoodBlues That's the thing; you have to know [i]how[/i] to read a study.
TrashCat · M
It doesn't take intelligence to parrot what they hear on tv or some random podcast
Crazywaterspring · 61-69, M
Willful ignorance is on the same level as science. No wonder this society is screwed.
Bill1372 · 51-55, M
Jim Hansen, a scientist when before Congress in 1988 and predicted NYC would be underwater in 20 years because of climate change and the “greenhouse effect”… This is why some don’t believe the bullshit. Kind of like the bullshit masks dopey liberals will be donning again soon.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@Bill1372 perhaps you might like to read this:

https://skepticalscience.com/Hansen-West-Side-Highway.htm
jackieash · 26-30
They claim that all science is covered by the bible. Some people (whom I've now blocked because they veered into conspiracy theory) refer to this as "real science". Any genuine scientists are dismissed by these people as "being part of the government interference in our lives". We get the same over here on "news" channels like GB News, who have a history of attempting to undermine those who have studied the effects of climste change for real.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@jackieash oh, I sort of figured that
S33K3R · 36-40, F
@jackieash lots of witch hunts going on these days 🤔
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@S33K3R really?
lemmy · 22-25, T
coz they are dumb
SW-User
They follow whetever their party says, since it furthers their conservative agenda, whether they believe it or not. Some of them probably do believe it privately.
fanuc2013 · 51-55, F
@SW-User you could say that about both parties!
smiler2012 · 56-60
{@spotpot] it is sad in a way where there ignorance and denial of this catastropic thing to our plant and all these people answer is too bury there head in the sand like ostriches
trump said it best in Utah on the campaign trail back in 2015.."i love uneducated people". Thats why they spread nothing but lies. Stupid people believe it.
fanuc2013 · 51-55, F
Does anyone remember when the "experts" predicted another "Ice Age" ? Or when the "experts" said back in the 70s that the world would run out of oil in 20 or 30 years? Or Y2K? Or Armageddon? Or the Mayan calendar that said the world was going to end in 2012? I could go on and on! It's no wonder the latest doom and gloom by the current crop of "experts" doesn't have any credibility.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@fanuc2013 Been explained. Look into it. It's been almost 50 years.
fanuc2013 · 51-55, F
@Graylight And the current crop of " experts" will probably have their theories explained away in 50 years. Possible?
Graylight · 51-55, F
@fanuc2013 Hmm, I don't know. Darwin. Einstein. Archimedes, Hippocrates...good knowledge seems to stick around.

If all we had were scientist's numbers, you could have a theoretical argument. But we have the world burning around us and most of us have eyes.

You clearly have no idea how science works.
Some of them don't oppose the ecocide at all. They're not going to reason with you, they're going to persue killing the ecosystem as a nation.
ron122 · 41-45, M
Because they don't allow themselves to be brainwashed like the gloom and doom clowns.
@ron122 I'm sorry, are you saying science is a bad thing?
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@fanuc2013 asks [quote]Does anyone remember when the "experts" predicted another "Ice Age" ?[/quote]
Uhhh ... that's a right-wing myth, dude.

The facts about scientific cooling predictions:

Update: source [b]https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/89/9/2008bams2370_1.xml[/b]
Dshhh · M
It follows, that the ignorant, will not believe what they do not understand
Bill1372 · 51-55, M
That’s a very broad, blanket, and ignorant statement
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
Is this a rhetorical question.
Renaci · 36-40
Education/knowledge and religion both use the same area of the brain so they are literally in direct competition with each other for the same resources. The more of one you have the less of the other you have. It's also why the two have historically been at each others throats for thousands of years. They ARE enemies of each other. But you can have people that are balanced between the two that will make claims such as theistic evolution.
Doctors Dunning and Kruger will be able to help you with that answer.

 
Post Comment