The answer can be found in Chris Mooney's book, "the republican brain" you can't argue with died in the wool conservative, because they are always right. they will never let factual information stand in the way of this certainty that they must be right. but we can't win. republicans have closed minds. they just see information that reinforces what they already believe. .... http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/chris-mooney-republican-brain-science-denial?page=3
factual. LoL Climate change artists (I'd hardly call them scientists) have damaged themselves with their tactics. It doesn't take too many times of being shown that they have manipulated the data and conspired among themselves to cause people to doubt their veracity.
you wouldn't call them scientists because either (a) you have insufficient education to understand what a scientist is, or (b) you have a republican brain, and are unable to consider any information, no matter how factual, which challenges what you believe you know. take your pick.
And what would you call the 700 or so dissenting skeptical scientists who aren't Republican? It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of science for those on both sides of the coin namely Republicans and Democrats. Cass, have you ever carried out an experiment before, been in a lab, written a lab report, done a research paper, collected data, or performed data analysis? Are you familiar with philosophy of science? Karl Popper, Kuhn, Duhem, Van Fraassen, feyerabend, or Hempel? If not then how can you sit here telling people that if they don't believe in global warming they are uneducated and stupid?
this is a trailer for the movie, 'cool it' [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPUcfQS-slo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPUcfQS-slo[/ame] it's a documentary film based on : 'Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming' is a book by the Danish statistician and political scientist Bjørn Lomborg. The book is a sequel to The Skeptical Environmentalist (first published in 1998 in Danish), which in English translation brought the author to world attention. Lomborg argues that many of the elaborate and expensive actions being considered to stop global warming will cost hundreds of billions of dollars without the same return on investment, often are based on emotional rather than strictly scientific assumptions, and may have very little impact on the world's temperature for centuries. Lomborg concludes that a limited carbon tax is needed in the First World as well as subsidies from the First World to the Third World to help fight ongoing humanitarian crises. “In his short new book, “Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming,” Mr. Lomborg reprises his earlier argument with a tighter focus. He tries to puncture more of what he says are environmental myths, like the imminent demise of polar bears.” — The New York Times “He therefore took on the Augean stables undertaking of checking every one of the hundreds of citations in Cool It. Friel's conclusion, as per his book's title, is that Lomborg is "a performance artist disguised as an academic." I don't want to be as trusting as the reviewers who praised Lomborg's scholarship without (it seems) bothering to check his references, so rather than taking Friel at his word just as they took Lomborg at his, I've done my best to do that checking. Although Friel engages in some bothersome overkill, overall his analysis is compelling.” — Sharon Begley, Newsweek http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_It:_The_Skeptical_Environmentalist%27s_Guide_to_Global_Warming
It doesn't matter how many times you've been shown that they didn't manipulate, that they didn't lie, that trick in science means method, etc, you just won't change your mind, because you're a conservative and you won't let facts get in the way of your opinion.
What do you mean? You'd call them scientists. Just because they are skeptics doesn't mean they have to be republicans. That's crazy talk.
yes I am familiar with the philosophy of science. I suspect Karl Popper would be turning in his grave if he knew you were dirtying his name by pretending his theories are in any way linked to climate denialists. If you also read the link I posted, you would see that Chris Mooney does not say non republicans DON'T think like this - or even that all republicans do .... just that is is more prevalent among republicans.
A lie made up by a Republican - no seriously! Where do you find that list? Well it was compiled by Marc "Weasel Words" Morano and posted on the Minority Senate Report by James Inhofe - check it out for yourself Because what is missing is critical thinking and analysis of twaddle. People post THE most ridiculous papers and then claim they "disprove" global warming Show me some solid science that disproves it
Agreed it is depressing really and is also discussed in the "Debunking Handbook" http://www.skepticalscience.com/Debunking-Handbook-Part-4-Worldview-Backfire-Effect.html In a way we all fall for confirmation bias as I know I will definitely trust NASA and the BOM Australia over say, an anonymous internet blogger calling himself "Tallbloke" (and you really should read that last it is a hoot of a "misunderstood science site" try this for example http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/antimatter-marine-life-photographed-on-solar-surface/ And I have replied to more than one right-winger quoting that site!!
Isn't it refreshing to see the persecution of science by the people who don't understand it and feel threatened by it? It is so 13th century.
Many of us understand climate change. The problem is the solutions all involve crippling the Western Economy.
I guess this mindset has always been there ... and scientists such as copernicus, galileo, keppler and many others have spent centuries being denounced by such people.
the shoe is actually on the other foot. why can't those conservatives with closed minds and a fear of new information learn? why do they not know that debunking actually means that something is proven false, not that some people disagree with it, therefore make up lies to demonise scientists and confuse people?
or more accurately, if people have closed minds and a fear of science, they are impervious to information that conflicts with their preconceived ideas. thats why the denialists keep pretending that scientists are the ones telling lies.
people who persist in bringing up climategate are only demonstrating that they have the kind of mindset referred to as a "republican brain". check the facts. understand them. you'll see what I mean.
I HAVE read the emails, and i UNDERSTAND what they were trying to do. You on the other hand.... The emails clearly show that the IPCC and UEA engaged in a campaign of LIES, and corrupt behavior. AGW is a POLITICAL agenda, you should stop treating it like your new religion...
Yes, it's a money making hoax. This is why climate scientists are all filthy rich, instead of earning next to nothing.
Do they really!!!!! Could you show us the email or emails that does this please. Cut and post it here - we could all do with a laugh. You seem to know all about it - why don't you show us the evidence of these "LIES, and corrupt behavior." Please post it here or apologise for posting a lie