Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

tamino.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 247 posts

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#201

Post by canhascodez »

splintercell wrote: post #198
canhascodez wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate change is man-made. We know how much oil we're burning, and we can measure the atmospheric CO2 carbon ratios, and also measure volcanic emissions. The picture is very consistent. There's also no real hope for an alternate mechanism. The actual effect of an increased partial pressure of CO2 is to push the CO2-rich region further out into space. Physics dictates that this must warm the Earth, by ~3.7 W/m^2 per…

I guess you don't know "Pascal's Wager" argument for climate change. Because this is equivalent of hearing "But Bible is real, God himself wrote that in the bible, how dare you suggest that there might be 1% chance of God not being real?" in an actual 'Pascal's wager' argument.

Do you know what empiricism is?

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#202

Post by mirimir »

pas wrote: post #191
briandear wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." "Keep the pressure on." "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside" "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." From Saul Alisky…

> “Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." Yet the linked post doesn't employ it. > "Keep the pressure on." This is the same as be vigilant, be persistent. Fight for what you believe in. This has nothing to do with skeptics, it's about engaging those who similarly do so. Thus it's an active discussion. The pressure is obvious because of the high stakes nature of the topic. > "The threat is usually more terrifying than…

It's not an exaggeration to say that "virtually none of the climate-change deniers have a clue about the underlying science". I mean, next time you have a conversation with one, ask them to discuss, in broad terms, the Earth's heat budget. Ask them to describe the roles played by CO2 and H20, and to explain how they're different. In my experience, mostly people are just spewing bullshit that they've heard. They're driven by ideology and religion, not data and sound models.

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#203

Post by colllectorof »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #166
colllectorof wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, how many research papers did your parents read when bringing you up? Can they cite the list of publications that convinced them to give or not give you the vaccinations? This is not how it works the real world. Saying "research is out there" is absolutely meaningless in convincing people, especially if you don't even post actual links/citations (which most people never do).

> how many research papers did your parents read when bringing you up? They listened to their doctors. Modern life is too complex for everyone to understand everything fully. So we delegate decisions to reliable authorities. If one wishes to disagree with said authorities, i.e. with the status quo , the burden of proof is on the person bringing the disagreement. The problem with anti-vaxers and climate deniers is the…

>They listened to their doctors. Modern life is too complex for everyone to understand everything fully.

Exactly. This directly contradicts the notion that "the research out there" is by itself sufficient to convince anyone of anything.

People rely on authorities, and different groups of people have different entities they consider authoritative.

>So we delegate decisions to reliable authorities.

Sure. Like, uh, elected politicians? Who benefit from politicization of science, no matter which side of each issues they end up on?

It it remarkable how oblivious most people are to the social dynamics of these issues.

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#204

Post by colllectorof »

subsection1h wrote: post #195
Tycho wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or going the another way, why such faith in the climate fitters? Global warming skepticism has got almost nothing to do with “climate denial PR campaigns” and everything to do with people having functioning BS detectors. To wit: * lofty claims of certainty based on computer models that can’t be effectively tested with out-of-sample data * argument relying on “consensus” of the scientific “community” * unseemly behavi…

> Global warming skepticism has [...] everything to do with people having functioning BS detectors. To wit: [...] LOL. Notice that none of your points address any specific studies. I've never met a self-identified climate change skeptic who reads the journals of the American Geophysical Union[1], like I have since the 1990s. But you people have "functioning BS detectors", "common sense", etc. -- just like all the cre…

>LOL. Notice that none of your points address any specific studies.

It doesn't matter. The post above gives a fairly good explanation of why there are so many people skeptical either about the climate change, or about its exact rate, or about the causes, or about the policies that should be enacted in its regard.

It is not very scientific in most cases, but from average person's perspective it makes sense. So the notion that every "climate denier" out there is some kind of raving mad lunatic is itself patently absurd. Their position is completely understandable, even if it's scientifically incorrect.

This is especially true when you get to the "policy" side of things.

As a side not, let's not pretend that climate change "believers" (denier, believer - both are horrible labels) are always rational. Most of them are only vaguely inspired by research and driven by more mundane and "social" motives.

For comparison, how much zeal have you seen around colony collapse disorder? It's a serious issues with potentially grave consequences for ecology and agriculture. Almost no one cares. There is no social signalling, no in-group/out-group dynamics, no vitriol. Because it hasn't been politicized. Yet.

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#205

Post by dymk »

iris-digital wrote: post #153
throwaway8879 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sky isn't blue. Not always anyway. And not from everywhere.

Great point on how significant perspective is.

And on how willful misinterpretation of an analogy isn't actually a point against the analogy

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#206

Post by [deleted] »

mnm1 wrote: post #176
mjfl wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All this may be true, but appeal to authority is still a logical fallacy. You can't just shame people into believing something they don't understand because "smarter" people believe it. It's a shameful failure of communication more than anything else. And I don't understand why people like you don't understand that.

Are you saying that all science is appeal to authority? Do you understand how science works? These climate change deniers can run their own experiments and verify the findings that almost all scientists agree with, but they don't or they choose to misinterpret the data like the last graph in the article. Science isn't appeal to authority and trying to reduce it to that is what is shameful. Truth does exist and if it…

[deleted]

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#207

Post by dragonwriter »

nkurz wrote: post #177
dragonwriter wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why such vitriol against "climate deniers?" Climate deniers are either dishonest people spreading lies aimed at sacrificing the future of humanity for short-term personal gain or people following them in the destruction of humanity out of tribal allegiance. There is literally no conceivable level of verbal vitriol that isn't far better than they deserve; the only reason for any restraint in that dimension is tactic…

Climate deniers are either dishonest people spreading lies aimed at sacrificing the future of humanity for short-term personal gain or people following them in the destruction of humanity out of tribal allegiance. This seems a little extreme. Do you really think everyone labelled a denier is dishonest, in that they actually know the "truth" and instead are choosing for personal gain to spread "lies"? Is there really…

> Do you really think everyone labelled a denier is dishonest

No, which is why the bit of my post you quote says “either dishonest ... or ...”

> This isn't the self-narrative I'd expect for someone "aimed at sacrificing the future of humanity for short-term personal gain".

It's very much a public self-narrative I'd expect from someone trying to sell a dishonest position on the issue; concern trolling is a concept with a name because it works, and propagandists know and leverage the fact that it works.

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#208

Post by mirimir »

freedomben wrote: post #165
luckydata wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because their stupidity is going to kill us all. I'm very vitriolic against people that are trying to kill me and my family, I can't help it.

I've been really thinking about this, and I have a follow up question. Attempted murder is a felony in the US. If denying climate change is really "going to kill us all," and climate deniers "are trying to kill [you] and [your] family," should they be jailed and prosecuted for attempted murder? If not, why? Are they not guilty of that crime?

That's implausible. Even a civil claim would be a stretch.

But still, I doubt that the major players will have such great reputations. Consider the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents collection, for example.[0]

0) https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#209

Post by systoll »

m3mpp wrote: post #128

Look at the temperature chart for the last 10,000 years, the greenland core ice temperature, GISP2 for example, and you'll see a completely different picture. Everything looks extreme when looked at a very small scale...

http://hot-topic.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/GISP210kla...

Here’s the GISP2 data, plus samples from the past two centuries.

Still seems pretty extreme to me.

Re: USA Temperature: can I sucker you?

#210

Post by flukus »

Tycho wrote: post #185
freedomben wrote: post #32

Honest question: Why such vitriol against "climate deniers?" The term "climate denier" is loading with negative connotation just on it's face, and it's rarely used in isolation in an otherwise respectful way. There will always be people that disagree with you about something. Some are honest, some are not. Why be an asshole and treat people poorly and disrespectfully? That makes you as bad or worse than them IMHO. Ev…

Or going the another way, why such faith in the climate fitters? Global warming skepticism has got almost nothing to do with “climate denial PR campaigns” and everything to do with people having functioning BS detectors. To wit: * lofty claims of certainty based on computer models that can’t be effectively tested with out-of-sample data * argument relying on “consensus” of the scientific “community” * unseemly behavi…

> lofty claims of certainty based on computer models that can’t be effectively tested with out-of-sample data

Models can be tested against history.

> argument relying on “consensus” of the scientific “community”

I doesn't rely on consensus, this is just a tool to show the extent of the certainty. Not sure why you feel the need to put consensus or community in quotes.

> unseemly behaviour of said community revealed in “climategate” emails

This is the ultimate exercise in cherry picking, there was one slightly nefarious sounding phrase in thousands of emails and you act like this negates a entire field of science.

> rebranding if the language from “global warming” to “climate change”

When exactly do you think this "rebranding" happened?

Post reply on HN