What do climate change deniers and anti-environmentalists want?

OnlyAplus · 29-08-2018 11:30PM #1

There’s a few threads around knocking the idea of man-made climate change and a lot of passionate arguing. But in all the arguments and “fact checking” and asserting that environmental regulations are not needed because some guy on YouTube claims that temperatures raised in the past, none of them explain to neutral observers such as myself why any of that matters, even if it is true.

The EURO 6 emissions regulations just got launched recently, so we’ll all be spending less at the pumps and breathing cleaner air as the national car fleet gets upgraded. How could anyone justify undoing any of that? I don’t like spending money on feul and I definitely don’t like either breathing in or being the cause of anyone else, particularly the frail, breathing any more NO, SO2, and carbon nanoparticles than any of us absolutely have to!

Ditto smog, does anyone remember how bad Dublin’s air was in the early 80’s? How can anyone justify bitching about climate change being a potential myth when we have the current situation where the entire population, from babies to OAPs, from the strongest buck to the weakest weed, are all breathing far cleaner air in 2018 compared to 30 years ago?

What do these lads want? Why is climate change denial such a passion for them?

I have read some of the debates and it appears that most of it is just bogged down in both sides arguing about some detail or other rather than explaining what the end goal they’re fighting for will look like.

However, environmentalists are at least upfront about what their end goal is: cleaner air, water, environment in general.

(Genuine questions here, forget nitpicking about details and gaps/errors in the climate record: tell us what climate change denialists’ end goals are, and if they’re solid, you’ll have a new supporter in me at least.)

jaxxx · 29-08-2018 11:38PM

Anyone who disputes that we as a species have not had an affect on climate change needs their head examined. All the pollution we've done throughout the years, the pollution we continue to do. But whenever these climate debates step up, there's always one thing that people never seem to mention: trees.

Everyone knows what roll trees, and plants in general, play towards the whole planet but trees especially so. It's estimated that since the dawn of modern humans, the global population of trees has been more than halved. Forgetting for a moment all those pollutants we cause because of industry, power generation, etc, just think about all that extra CO2 that is in the air because there are only half as many trees as there was maybe 10,000 years ago. And people still believe we've had no impact towards climate change? Give me a break.

endacl · 29-08-2018 11:39PM

OnlyAplus wrote: »

What do these lads want? Why is climate change denial such a passion for them?

They want to be right about something everybody else is wrong about. Up is down, etc.

Also. They want to win the internet.

Kermit.de.frog · 29-08-2018 11:40PM

"Climate change deniers"?

Interesting language.

Is that suppose to evoke thoughts of "holocaust deniers"?

The climate has always changed and will always change. What is disputed is the extent to which "man-made" climate change is an issue.

weisses · 29-08-2018 11:41PM

Become POTUS

jaxxx · 29-08-2018 11:41PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

"Climate Change Deniers"?

Interesting language.

Is that suppose to evoke thoughts of "holocaust deniers"?

The climate is always changing and will always change. What is disputed is the extent to which "man-made" climate change is an issue.

Another perfect example of another thing people always fail to mention, to make that distinction between or even acknowledge naturally occurring climate change and man made climate change!

Gimme A Pound · 29-08-2018 11:43PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

"Climate change deniers"?

Interesting language.

Is that suppose to evoke thoughts of "holocaust deniers"?

Ah I dunno if it's that interesting - it just means denying despite a good deal of evidence, what's inaccurate or problematic about that?

Your Face · 29-08-2018 11:43PM

One wonders how much will this utopia cost me, a humble taxpayer.

JCX BXC · 29-08-2018 11:46PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The climate is always changing and will always change. What is disputed is the extent to which "man-made" climate change is an issue.

Exactly, this is the crux of the issue, I see nobody logical denying that climate change exists, if they do they'd be ignoring significant amounts of historical evidence. However there is logical arguments debating the extent of how much man has actually influenced the climate. Sure we've polluted alot over the years, but most of the evidence we see is saying that the climate is changing, not why it is changing. What exact influence do these greenhouse gases have? Often reports seen to correlate ALL changes in climate with the effect of pollutants, but what we need to prove is to what extent this climate change would have occured without our industrialisation. This is the main gripe I'd have with the entire "climate change/global warming" outrage.

I'm not going to deny that climate change is occuring, or that humans have somehow contributed to it over the years, but I'd like to see proper proven evidence of how much we've actually contributed to climate change, and how negative it actually is. Are we simply speeding up an inevitable process? Will our few hundred years of industrialisation simply be an insignificant blip in the entire lifespan of the earth? Or is our influence causing absolute devastation? With all the politics in this issue now, we never actually get that question, arguably the most important question we can ask now, answered.

Guy:Incognito · 29-08-2018 11:48PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

"Climate change deniers"?

Interesting language.

Is that suppose to evoke thoughts of "holocaust deniers"?

.

People have been denying stuff since long before the holocaust happened. But sure derail away...........

Junkyard Tom · 29-08-2018 11:52PM

Fucking neckbeards.

Atlantic Dawn · 29-08-2018 11:54PM

I wouldn't hold my breath for any clean air from Euro 6 regulations, the majority of diesel testing for Euro 5 was found to be pure fraud. The NCT in this country doesn't check for dpf removals. We don't check trucks for Adblue defeat devices that are rampant in the UK, it's a case of eyes wide shut.

Kristopherus · 29-08-2018 11:56PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Fucking neckbeards.

Atta boy !!!!! Up & at 'em

:D:D

DivingDuck · 29-08-2018 11:59PM

What do climate change deniers and anti-environmentalists want? To not have to change their behaviour.

It's the same as people who don't want who quit addictions to drugs/booze/sex/whatever. People are very resistant to changing their behaviour, especially to a behaviour that's less convenient or pleasurable or easy. Humans have a great capacity for denial when accepting reality means big and difficult change.

Kermit.de.frog · 30-08-2018 12:09AM

Faye Small Tidewater wrote: »

Ah I dunno if it's that interesting - it just means denying despite a good deal of evidence, what's inaccurate or problematic about that?

Firstly it's an attempt to subconciously link those who are sceptical of the effect on the planet's atmosphere of human activity with one of the most maniacal regimes ever known to man as though it's somehow on the same level.

This is intentional to degrade and demean people who don't share an opinion.

Secondly it's not a remotely accurate tag. There is NOBODY, not even Donald Trump, who thinks the climate is not changing.

So it is not inaccurate, it is just false.

TheShockmaster · 30-08-2018 12:20AM

Attention mostly

Corb_lund · 30-08-2018 12:24AM

I don't think for most its attention whoring or even a disbelief in the science.

I think its a fear of a changing world which is understandable. We all wanted the ferris bueller life of people in their middle class suburbs with fancy cars and typically western lifestyle.

Climate change and the like threatens a way of life already dying via the changing economy.

And there is an argument that the perception of us messing around with bottles whilst the Chinese build coal reactors....is akin to pissing I a furnace.

Gimme A Pound · 30-08-2018 12:25AM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Firstly it's an attempt to subconciously link those who are sceptical of the effect on the planet's atmosphere of human activity with one of the most maniacal regimes ever known to man as though it's somehow on the same level.

This is intentional to degrade and demean people who don't share an opinion.

Secondly it's not a remotely accurate tag. There is NOBODY, not even Donald Trump, who thinks the climate is not changing.

So it is not inaccurate, it is just false.

Well I think climate change is shorthand for man-made climate change and that denier is referring to people who don't accept it at all as a possibility. I really don't think it's an attempt, conscious or subconscious, to liken them to Holocaust deniers. The definition of denier is "a person who denies something, especially someone who refuses to admit the truth of a concept or proposition that is supported by the majority of scientific or historical evidence" so it's a pretty generic term, not as pointed as you suggest, and could be applied to anything. My outlook is similar to JCX BXC's and I don't think that's denial - it's acceptance of the possibilities but not being entirely convinced either, because as you say, the climate has always been changing. I think denier refers to people who just flat out refuse to accept any evidence at all.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 30-08-2018 01:49AM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

"Climate change deniers"?

Interesting language.

Is that suppose to evoke thoughts of "holocaust deniers"?

The climate has always changed and will always change. What is disputed is the extent to which "man-made" climate change is an issue.

There’s no real debate on recent global warming. it’s definitely human caused.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 30-08-2018 01:54AM

DivingDuck wrote: »

What do climate change deniers and anti-environmentalists want? To not have to change their behaviour.

It's the same as people who don't want who quit addictions to drugs/booze/sex/whatever. People are very resistant to changing their behaviour, especially to a behaviour that's less convenient or pleasurable or easy. Humans have a great capacity for denial when accepting reality means big and difficult change.

It’s more than that. Firstly nobody is changing their behaviour, any self proclaimed environmentalist I have ever met was a prodigious carbon producer - big cars, family holidays, big house.

The antis are right about that.

However the deniers don’t even like new technology like wind farms, or solar, or new batteries, or tidal. It’s just another tribal group.

Minderbinder · 30-08-2018 05:40AM

The deniers that matter don’t want their business or industry to be negatively affected by this. It’s that simple really.

Graces7 · 30-08-2018 07:03AM

Simple. They want to do as they please .

Wanderer78 · 30-08-2018 07:10AM

They tend to live in an altered reality, not truly connected with our reality. Not only is their thinking dangerous for all of humanity, but it's very destructive for themselves, their reality must be a highly stressful existence

Atlantic Dawn · 30-08-2018 07:22AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

They tend to live in an altered reality, not truly connected with our reality. Not only is their thinking dangerous for all of humanity, but it's very destructive for themselves, their reality must be a highly stressful existence

Yes encouraging people to drive diesel cars, use wood burning stoves in urban areas and think that urban flooding is caused by anything other than bad planning.

dudara · 30-08-2018 07:25AM

It’s a mixture of factors in my opinion.

There are anti-climate change believers out there because they naturally incline to distrust anything they perceive as progressive, “left”, “liberal” or even anything that is just plain educated or scientific. Similar to anti-vaxxers in a way.

Then there is the more sinister business-driven agendas. They have a lot invested in the current fossil-fuel driven world. It’s funny though because making the right investments in cleaner tech would reap huge rewards in the future, but so far they generally appear unwilling/unable to do this.

And then, there’s the hard societal facts that would mean admitting that we’re at 7 billion humans and growing with no intention of slowing down. No one wants to introduce caps on population growth, but how else would we be quickly able to control the population explosion?

Edi: also to add that taking steps to make things better will probably cost more, e.g. removing and reducing plastic from our every day lives will mean finding alternatives, which will probably cost more short term. Stopping intensive farming of terrible, mass-produced meat means paying more for properly raised animals. Not everyone can or wants to pay more.

Wanderer78 · 30-08-2018 07:32AM

Atlantic Dawn wrote:

Yes encouraging people to drive diesel cars, use wood burning stoves in urban areas and think that urban flooding is caused by anything other than bad planning.

Is there more sinister factors at play that has caused these issues, such as lobbying from within the fossil fuels industries, construction industries, financial industries etc etc etc?

el diablo · 03-09-2018 03:08AM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

There’s no real debate on recent global warming. it’s definitely human caused.

Definitely? According to who? The government funded scientists who'll lose their funding and be banished from their profession if they question it? The planet has been going through cooling and warming cycles since the beginning of time. Al Gore made some ridiculous claims back in the mid-nineties that Arctic Sea ice would be all gone by 2013 but it has actually expanded since.
Why are we seeing no mention of these record summer snowfalls (see video below) on the mainstream news? I guess it doesn't fit the globalist narrative.

Arghus · 03-09-2018 03:44AM

They mainly don't want to do anything, just keep on doing as they have been doing.

the_syco · 03-09-2018 04:30AM

OnlyAplus wrote: »

What do these lads want? Why is climate change denial such a passion for them?

Mostly, your money.

el diablo · 03-09-2018 04:36AM

the_syco wrote: »

Mostly, your money.

That makes no sense. Maybe you can expand on that? It's actually the climate change alarmists that want your money (in the form of increased taxes) rather than the deniers.

03-09-2018 04:59AM

Not sure why people even worry about climate change deniers. Unlike anti-vaxx people who can affect others, believing or not believing in man-made climate change does nothing to change a person's behaviour.

My footprint is far far lower than a lot of people who'd bang on about the environment, and that's before kids even come into it, which I won't be having.

What do climate change deniers and anti-environmentalists want?

Comments