Help! Climate denying father
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-12-2016, 08:55 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(07-12-2016 02:52 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Even if the deniers where right. Why deter progress? Because you like your car to make the vroom sound? Because you don't like your energy to come freely to you? (Wind, sun, ocean currents) You don't like the idea that your hairspray is using compressed air?

If I was told the damn was cracking I rather be the guy that buys a boat, then the guy that kicks the damn.

Why would you equate rational skepticism with deterring progress? I've read papers about global warming and they appear to be correct. I would also like to save on my electrical bill and am considering solar. I already have solar water heating panels. I would prefer an electric car. I don't want to breath pollutants.

The two concepts have nothing to do with each other.

The point is it is a political issue which has been fed by an ecological movement.

Here's the problem. Take Canada, for instance. It's in Nafta. If Donald Trump tears up the Paris agreement on carbon tax, then he makes US manufacturing more profitable than Canadian manufacturing and since businesses can set up in the US rather than Canada, Canada is screwed.

That is the whole point that warmists miss. There's a political and economic cost to this. China undercuts the rest of the world with cheap labour, no health and safety regulation, manipulation of its currency and no government regulation of pollution with greenhouse gases etc. But, the west is supposed to burden its industry with this tax which makes it even more costly v. Chinese business.

If there is a political, social and economic agenda behind this and it is wrong science, then we should know about it and not ignore people who are raising the alarm. The other side of it is whether creating taxes does, in fact, have any effect. Certainly, if there are countries which do not sign up to it and business can transfer to those countries, it has had no effect other than to transfer wealth to these countries, which is why you should be skeptical of people like Maurice Strong who was a CCF member and they were Canadian "communists" so he had a clear agenda.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2016, 11:13 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
Imagine you go to buy a car and you see one which is ok but isn't as technologically advanced and is not so stylish, looks a bit old. They you go to another dealer and he has a cheaper, newer looking car with a more efficient engine and you ask him how the car could be built for less money. He answers that the other car is built somewhere that is taxed more heavily because that country wants to cut emissions from older cars. So, which car do you buy? Do you go back and pay for an older dirtier car because it is built somewhere which taxed the manufacturer so it couldn't build a newer cleaner car. Of course, the country it is built in has no emissions controls and is a huge polluter since the local people drive around in cheap old pollutiong cars and the factories use cheap coal.

That's the sort of small scale mental calculations that go on in businesses and people's heads. Of course, you buy the cheaper car because it is cleaner and better looking. And you can say you've done your bit against global warming. No on buys anything because a government has imposed a tax to burden an industry and shift wealth to a third world country. You multiply these calculations and it means that these sorts of tax policies don't work.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2016, 05:46 AM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(07-12-2016 05:46 AM)morondog Wrote:  ... So because X down the road is bad, I can do Y without worrying, after all the Japanese are worse than us. Facepalm

I think you should look at what I said in context. All these countries using nuclear power now (and consequently having low CO2 emissions because of it) will need to store the waste securely for thousands of years, and face the very real dangers associated with a nuclear meltdown.

I don't think you understand how grave the situation is in Japan. They have spent in just 5 years beyond 100 billion USD on the clean up so far - and it will last at a minimum of hundreds of years, and I believe thousands if they cannot find a way to entomb the meltdowns. Not to mention that the nuclear fallout from the meltdowns could have destroyed most of Japan and it was blind luck that didn't happen.

My Blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2016, 05:59 AM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
At work.

Sorry for sticking an oar in but I note the conversation has drifted into the EVILS of nuclear POWER (Sorry I can't add a suitably meniacle laugh either)

So, the fact that Fukoshima reactor plant are old. Couldn't be torn down due to folks "worry" about teh ebils. Hence newer, safer (Much like my Ford Focus is newer and safer than my previous Ford EA) plant could he built in its place because people still want electricity.

So said old plant gets run over by first an earthquake to rival Godzilla sitting on it and THEN a frickin tidal wave and the plant DOES NOT immediately China syndrom that now seems to cause folk's greif.

*Sigh*

So..... on top of denying the acumulated science of global temperstures.... we're going to throw nuclear scary in as well?

Would like to add more with mors time etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Peebothuhul's post
08-12-2016, 12:12 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
Aliza, here are a few other ways to look at your father.

Let’s say he knows that a lot of fear mongering, dressed up as “science”, comes from government and universities (redundant). I have no idea if he also fears transistors, acetaminophen, plastics and light emitting diodes. But let’s assume, if he is like me, he does not fear these other things.

Let’s also assume that he does not fear saccharine, saturated animal fat and carbon dioxide. That sounds perfectly logical to me. It sounds illogical to shrug your shoulders at the first two and then cower in the corner at the other.

I caught Bill Moyers weeping on PBS about the planet his grandchildren were going to inherit from people like your father and me. Think of your father seeing this, then bursting out laughing at the faux crying of a grown man on TV. It was too damn funny.

Can you, as a self described skeptic understand, maybe just a little teeny tiny bit, how others might put up red flags when government attempts to frighten them?

It should not be that hard, unless, and this is a really big unless, you have some attraction to government funded scientists frightening people. If that is the case, I can confidently conclude that you will not be able to reconcile with your father.

Imagine if all that fear mongering was coming from Walmart.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2016, 12:16 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(08-12-2016 12:12 PM)Walter Wrote:  Aliza, here are a few other ways to look at your father.

Let’s say he knows that a lot of fear mongering, dressed up as “science”, comes from government and universities (redundant). I have no idea if he also fears transistors, acetaminophen, plastics and light emitting diodes. But let’s assume, if he is like me, he does not fear these other things.

Let’s also assume that he does not fear saccharine, saturated animal fat and carbon dioxide. That sounds perfectly logical to me. It sounds illogical to shrug your shoulders at the first two and then cower in the corner at the other.

I caught Bill Moyers weeping on PBS about the planet his grandchildren were going to inherit from people like your father and me. Think of your father seeing this, then bursting out laughing at the faux crying of a grown man on TV. It was too damn funny.

Can you, as a self described skeptic understand, maybe just a little teeny tiny bit, how others might put up red flags when government attempts to frighten them?

It should not be that hard, unless, and this is a really big unless, you have some attraction to government funded scientists frightening people. If that is the case, I can confidently conclude that you will not be able to reconcile with your father.

Imagine if all that fear mongering was coming from Walmart.

Holy hell. Universities and scientists aren't "government" and aren't using "government" to try and scare people.

Showing, through science and data and evidence, what the effects of climate change are isn't about fear mongering, it's about showing the full breadth of consequences of climate change. We see it in the past and we are seeing it happen now. That's not fear, that's reality. If it scares some people, it only seems to embolden others. Scientists aren't using emotion to substantiate or support climate change, but deniers are.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2016, 12:41 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(08-12-2016 12:12 PM)Walter Wrote:  I caught Bill Moyers weeping on PBS about the planet his grandchildren were going to inherit from people like your father and me. Think of your father seeing this, then bursting out laughing at the faux crying of a grown man on TV. It was too damn funny.

Can you, as a self described skeptic understand, maybe just a little teeny tiny bit, how others might put up red flags when government attempts to frighten them?

Yes, yes, yes, 1000x yes! I think if my father saw something like that on TV, the emotional display alone would make him sick to his stomach. It would certainly turn him off to even listening to the message.

I'm trying to understand where he's coming from so when I make my counter argument, I can hopefully address his objections and try to open the door wide enough so he will at least listen my position.

Oh and you also asked if he's a tin foil nutter. No, he definitely isn't. So far, his argument seems rational and logical. It's just that it's all one-sided. He's refusing to hear the other side at all.

I've been listening to his objections and I'm trying to express that I understand them, and then I plan to counter them with a new narrative that I'm (slowly) constructing from information in this thread.

Edit: I just realized what a spectacular job I did constructing my thoughts into paragraphs for this post. Well done, Aliza! Well done!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Aliza's post
08-12-2016, 12:50 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(08-12-2016 12:41 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(08-12-2016 12:12 PM)Walter Wrote:  I caught Bill Moyers weeping on PBS about the planet his grandchildren were going to inherit from people like your father and me. Think of your father seeing this, then bursting out laughing at the faux crying of a grown man on TV. It was too damn funny.

Can you, as a self described skeptic understand, maybe just a little teeny tiny bit, how others might put up red flags when government attempts to frighten them?

Yes, yes, yes, 1000x yes! I think if my father saw something like that on TV, the emotional display alone would make him sick to his stomach. It would certainly turn him off to even listening to the message.

I'm trying to understand where he's coming from so when I make my counter argument, I can hopefully address his objections and try to open the door wide enough so he will at least listen my position.

Oh and you also asked if he's a tin foil nutter. No, he definitely isn't. So far, his argument seems rational and logical. It's just that it's all one-sided. He's refusing to hear the other side at all.

I've been listening to his objections and I'm trying to express that I understand them, and then I plan to counter them with a new narrative that I'm (slowly) constructing from information in this thread.

Edit: I just realized what a spectacular job I did constructing my thoughts into paragraphs for this post. Well done, Aliza! Well done!

It was until you edited it.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
08-12-2016, 12:54 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(08-12-2016 12:41 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(08-12-2016 12:12 PM)Walter Wrote:  I caught Bill Moyers weeping on PBS about the planet his grandchildren were going to inherit from people like your father and me. Think of your father seeing this, then bursting out laughing at the faux crying of a grown man on TV. It was too damn funny.

Can you, as a self described skeptic understand, maybe just a little teeny tiny bit, how others might put up red flags when government attempts to frighten them?

Yes, yes, yes, 1000x yes! I think if my father saw something like that on TV, the emotional display alone would make him sick to his stomach. It would certainly turn him off to even listening to the message.

I'm trying to understand where he's coming from so when I make my counter argument, I can hopefully address his objections and try to open the door wide enough so he will at least listen my position.

Oh and you also asked if he's a tin foil nutter. No, he definitely isn't. So far, his argument seems rational and logical. It's just that it's all one-sided. He's refusing to hear the other side at all.

I've been listening to his objections and I'm trying to express that I understand them, and then I plan to counter them with a new narrative that I'm (slowly) constructing from information in this thread.

Edit: I just realized what a spectacular job I did constructing my thoughts into paragraphs for this post. Well done, Aliza! Well done!

It is worth pointing out two things to him related to how scientists respond to the consequences of climate change:
1) the scientific literature is devoid of this emotional reaction and "fear-mongering." You can find scientific articles to show your father that demonstrate that scientists will abstain from injecting their own personal opinions and any emotion into the science.

2) Scientists are human too and are allowed to have their own personal feelings and reactions to climate change. So what if a scientist gives their personal opinion and is emotional about it? That isn't relevant with respect to whether or not the science is reliable and emotionless.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
08-12-2016, 01:51 PM
RE: Help! Climate denying father
(07-12-2016 08:55 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  
(07-12-2016 02:52 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Even if the deniers where right. Why deter progress? Because you like your car to make the vroom sound? Because you don't like your energy to come freely to you? (Wind, sun, ocean currents) You don't like the idea that your hairspray is using compressed air?

If I was told the damn was cracking I rather be the guy that buys a boat, then the guy that kicks the damn.



Why would you equate rational skepticism with deterring progress?

Being skeptical is fine. But it dosen't mean the person is close minded of the facts presented.

(07-12-2016 08:55 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I've read papers about global warming and they appear to be correct. I would also like to save on my electrical bill and am considering solar. I already have solar water heating panels. I would prefer an electric car. I don't want to breath pollutants.

Ok so I don't see the problem you had with my statement. This clearly was directed directly towards you then. It'seems just been the majority of the climate deniers, that I have talked with. Ignore anything that is presented. They don't read the papers. They don't associate the increasingly hot weather, or the rising sea levels as a problem.

(07-12-2016 08:55 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  The two concepts have nothing to do with each other.

The point is it is a political issue which has been fed by an ecological movement.

Here's the problem. Take Canada, for instance. It's in Nafta. If Donald Trump tears up the Paris agreement on carbon tax, then he makes US manufacturing more profitable than Canadian manufacturing and since businesses can set up in the US rather than Canada, Canada is screwed.

That is the whole point that warmists miss. There's a political and economic cost to this. China undercuts the rest of the world with cheap labour, no health and safety regulation, manipulation of its currency and no government regulation of pollution with greenhouse gases etc. But, the west is supposed to burden its industry with this tax which makes it even more costly v. Chinese business.

If there is a political, social and economic agenda behind this and it is wrong science, then we should know about it and not ignore people who are raising the alarm. The other side of it is whether creating taxes does, in fact, have any effect. Certainly, if there are countries which do not sign up to it and business can transfer to those countries, it has had no effect other than to transfer wealth to these countries, which is why you should be skeptical of people like Maurice Strong who was a CCF member and they were Canadian "communists" so he had a clear agenda.

Still confused. You see there is a climate problem but you feel that the government is going to or is using it to raise taxes?

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: