The psychology of climate change

275 posts / 0 new
Last post
Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
The psychology of climate change

The psychology of climate change


Organisers of a youth rally told me earlier this year that climate change was the activist issue for their generation and that young people would turn out to protest in record numbers.

When hundreds of young people showed up on the anointed day I thought - where are the rest? If this is the issue, where is the mass demonstration of dissent?

You know that public movements must be struggling when incumbent politicians are forced to urge them on. UK Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Ed Miliband, and his brother, Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, have both called for more public mobilisation on climate change, although the UK government has also used anti-terror powers against some climate activists as I described in this blog last week.

Former US vice-president, Nobel Laureate and prominent global warming activist, Al Gore, has called for young people to engage in civil disobedience over the issue.

Now in his new book, Our Choice - A Plan To Solve The Climate Crisis, Mr Gore devotes a chapter to analysing why climate change has failed to prompt a greater public outcry.

In it he asks "Why is it that humanity is failing to confront this unprecedented mortal threat? What is it about the way we human beings process information and make choices that promotes global procrastination?"

I suspect the chapter is part therapy for Mr Gore who must be hurting after years of relentless presentations around the world which, despite warning of the possible demise of human civilisation, have failed to ignite the collective action he'd hoped for.

I've heard exasperated climate scientists similarly ponder what they regard as bewildering inaction.

CSIRO's former climate director, Dr Graeme Pearman, suffered a personal crisis after confronting this question before deciding to study psychology, which he describes as the new frontier in climate change:

"Behavioural issues are likely to be much more important than the development of improved descriptions of exactly what happens or might happen to the climate. These are the main barriers to the actions that are needed." 

Mr Gore says he conducted 30 "solutions summits" with leading international experts to discuss how to design the multi-faceted battle plan in his book. They included brain scientists who told him the climate threat seemed too remote and unprecedented to trigger survival reflexes. In short, primordial human wiring is tuned to the likes of carnivorous predators, lightning strikes and blood-curdling rival clansmen.

Harvard University's Daniel Gilbert has provided a sharply amusing account of how global warming challenges our evolutionary psychology -  if it doesn't make us duck or twitch or even feel repulsed, can it really be so bad? 

Behavioural scientists also told him that "Simply laying out the facts won't work … The barrage of negative, even terrifying, information can trigger denial or paralysis or, at the very least, procrastination." Sounds like a bad rap for his Academy Award winning film, An Inconvenient Truth, which helped raise global awareness of the issue.

But scientists told Mr Gore that the human brain can commit to multigenerational goals although this can be undermined by constant stress and excessive distraction, both of which abound in modern society.

"The primary users of the new brain research are the marketers and advertisers of goods and services … the average American now sees an average of 3,000 advertising messages per day … material consumption in our society has reached absurd levels."  We have lots and lots more stuff even though there's been no measured increase in well-being and happiness. Maybe it also means we're less able to focus on long-term sustainability because we're too busy shopping. It's exceedingly difficult for reason to challenge the powerful forces of habit," he writes.

But Mr Gore remains optimistic that gorging on short-term gratification "can be … overridden by an innate and powerful desire to do right by those to whom we feel some connection." Like our kids and grandkids.

To deliver a more effective message, proponents must "… strengthen the linkage between solutions to global warming and solutions to other challenges (economic, strategic and social) that seem more immediate and are more likely to induce a desire to make the necessary changes."

A recent report released by the American Psychological Association suggests a series of practical approaches. For instance, most people want to fit in and some researchers found that people will cut their electricity use immediately if told their neighbours use less than they do. Other researchers found that people respond in the same way to future environmental decisions as they do to financial ones. Thus, schemes providing up-front cash for home insulation are more effective than promising long-term savings.

"Messages are more effective if framed to warn people that they will lose $500 over 10 years if they don't follow a particular course of action to limit climate change, than if they are told they'll be $500 better off if they do take action," the report says.

But is our psychology the only reason why climate change is slipping down our 'To Do' list?  Does lack of political and economic leadership, inaccessible science (how many people have really read the 2007 IPCC report?), aggressive vested industrial interests and extremist greenies all combine to dilute the collective will Mr Gore is trying to summon on this epic issue? Another one of his chapters analyses the political obstacles.

David Spratt, an Australian climate activist and co-author of Climate Code Red, blames apathy on "a systemic political under-estimation of the seriousness of the problem … Because governments are not honest with themselves about the size and urgency of the problem, they necessarily transmit a shallow view of the problem to the electorate, who follow suit in seeing climate as an incremental problem. Voters are sold a show-bag of dinky policy actions on climate as 'solving the problem', and they reasonably conclude the problem can't be all that serious. Much of the climate advocacy lobby is guilty of the same incapacity."

But a recent public campaign by the UK Government prompted complaints that its TV ad on climate change was too scary. Have a look and see what you think.

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

Last time I checked the global temperature was dropping over this decade by one degree after rising a degree during the 90's.  Things are never as simple as changing one parameter (eg CO2).  For example CO2 holds solar energy while smoke reflects solar energy.  These models act as if only one parameter is changing on earth and that is CO2 when in fact there is much more to pollution than just CO2.

One thing I know is that our environment changes.  It never stays the same.  It has not throughout history.  Money would be better spent learning how to adapt to changes.  I beleive that over the next couple years as the actual data shows temperatures dropping we will be back to worrying about the new ice age like they were back in the 1970's when temperatures dropped.

People just aren't going to quit driving or eating meat.  Even Al Gore still eats meat even though he knows methane pollution is slightly worse in percent warming than CO2.  If you are still worried about global warming then peak oil may save you by crashing the economy.

Sorry, but in my humble opinion global warming is just as much bullshit as this contrived swine flu crisis.

Doc

strabes's picture
strabes
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 7 2009
Posts: 1032
Re: The psychology of climate change

It's a vehicle to power for the rich.  Gore has become a baron by aligning himself with the Goldman/Rothschild/Rockefeller desire to use global warming (30 years ago they tried global cooling, but of course once the solar cycle kicked back up they had a problem) as the mechanism to get the lower classes to agree to their own servitude.  It props up a controlling class over the masses.  It's the first mechanism they've found that they think will actually work...the proletariat fighting the bourgeois "man" didn't work.  Gore lives extravagantly and pumps out more CO2 and CFCs than 99% of people, but he doesn't really care about that.  He's after power and control.  

Having said that, there's no question our human systems creating exponential growth are wreaking havoc on habitat, wilderness, etc.  We need to voluntarily reorganize ourselves locally and escape the growth empire, rather than letting the people who created and controlled the empire continue controlling things with their cap-and-trade, taxation, inspection, regulation schemes.

So it sucks to have to fight the self-righteous politicians who've hijacked the issue because I'm immediately McCarthy-ized.  I'm actually quite an "environmentalist" but I refuse to join Gore's religious crusade.

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

Nice post Strabes.  I am really pro environment also. This global warming BS is all about controlling the masses, not really the environment.

jturbo68's picture
jturbo68
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 4 2009
Posts: 193
Re: The psychology of climate change

Here is the latest Global temperature averages thru 2008 from NASA.

Global Mean Temperature has not been dropping over the past decade ... In fact, the opposite is occuring.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/Fig1.gif

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
Re: The psychology of climate change

DTM,

    I've been on both sides of the "debate" over AGW or climate change, and have belatedly joined the ranks of the AGW believers. I've seen the effects of it with the aspen and pinyon pine die-offs in my own backyard. It is real. The rich don't have to fabricate this catastrophe. Since when have the elite not profited off of death and misfortune?

The problem is that in human time scales, AGW is slow-moving and non-apparent. We don't fear what is not in our face. For most, it's an ill-defined threat relagated to the science community. If Joe six-pack goes to the theater to watch 2012, then he can believe what he sees on the screen because things are moving around in real time(human time scale). There's no latency.

strabes's picture
strabes
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 7 2009
Posts: 1032
Re: The psychology of climate change

Appreciate the deep insult xray that only you are enlightened enough to be aware of long-term trends and the rest of us just watch movies. Nobody I'm aware of denies that climate changes.  Causation is where the debate lies.  

It seems you're the one with the limited timeframe that only goes back 30 years or so...a pine tree dwarfs the lifespan of a human but geological time dwarfs the lifespan of a pine tree.  Do you forget that your pines grew from land that used to be under an ocean of ice?  Do you blame humans for the fact that the pines weren't in your backyard then? The presence or absence of a pine tree doesn't prove human climate change. All the pines died in my grandparent's backyard as well over the course of 30 years, which has caused me some grief.  Now if I were to assume that my childhood nirvana was the norm by which to measure the world, I might tend to agree with you "hey! something destroyed my nirvana. must be all you people!"  And actually I could agree with a human cause if it's based on evidence of a pollutant that poisoned the trees or something like that (that's actually what local authorites say...midwest manufacturing before it was shipped to Mexico/China put a pollutant in the air that killed the particular pines in my grandpa's yard).  But I don't believe (it's a belief) that too many cars and factories changed the earth's temperature from what the sun would've caused otherwise and therefore the trees were killed.  The sun will do what it's going to do regardless of whether humans exist or not.  

rhare's picture
rhare
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 30 2009
Posts: 1267
Re: The psychology of climate change

xraymike79 said: I've seen the effects of it with the aspen and pinyon pine die-offs in my own backyard

Question: How do you know the die off was due to AGW? Seems to be only anecdotal evidence.

jturbek1 said: Here is the latest Global temperature averages thru 2008 from NASA.

Interesting, I tried to find how those charts were generated.  If you read about it you discover that there is an awful lot of "estimating" going on, particularly anything prior to 1950.  When I look at the base data, it sure looks like that sea temperature has been going down over the last few years. Also, that blue area that represents the 95% confidentiality is pretty wide.

Here is another interesting site that does an analysis of the different temperature metrics.  It looks like the GISS data from NASA could have some bias being added to the warm side.

But, I don't think any of this matters.  We may be warming, we may be cooling, the right question to ask: "Is it caused by man?" and the more important question at the moment is to ask "Is it caused by man-made CO2?"  These questions are important because of the potential policy/legal/lifestyle changes we might make based on this data.  My take is that since 95% of all GHC (green house gases) are natural, that the far less than 5% we could actually change would have little/no impact.  Please see my posts on another forum topic started by DamTheMatrix.

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
Re: The psychology of climate change

Strabes,

Those dying pinyon trees aren't just in my backyard; it's all over the Southwest. Considering that a single coal plant creates 10,000 tons of sulfur dioxide, among other pollutants, and generates about 3,700,000 tons of carbon dioxide every year, and at last count there are over 50,000 coal-fired plants worldwide, it would seem possible that those numbers alone would cause someone to consider the possiblity that AGW could be real. (Coal power plants alone emit roughly 30 times more CO2 than all volcanoes worldwide).Over 600 million ICE cars in the world couldn't effect climate any. Nahhh, couldn't have any effect at all.

With all the other environmental problems going on, why do you balk at AGW?

This will be the last reply from me on this subject because I can see the push back from others is fruitless.

Mike

strabes's picture
strabes
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 7 2009
Posts: 1032
Re: The psychology of climate change

Quote:
With all the other environmental problems going on, why do you balk at AGW?

1) Because it's the one used by the control freaks to push their agenda toward global governance because they seem to be aware that there's something about this one issue that has religious overtones, or somehow taps apocalyptic triggers in people.  

2) Because I've seen too many journals and heard too many scientists describe how the solar cycle drives the climate change we see, and then they describe the Gestapo atmosphere in the scientific community right now about this particular issue.  "Go along with us or you are banished!"

3) Because I see too much media manipulation and tugging heart strings.  A polar bear standing on an iceberg makes little Johnny cry to mommy when he gets home from school--pure indoctrination--but contributes nothing to the kid actually learning the facts.

4) Because 30 years ago it was global cooling.

5) Because Al Gore is the guy you hated in high school that ran for student treasurer but nobody voted for because he couldn't throw a baseball right.  

You label a perspective that disagrees with yours simple "pushback."  That's convenient.  Apparently you labeled it pushback before you even read it and considered what I said because, if you had, you'd know my point was that even if all aspen and pinyons in the whole world disappeared it still proves nothing about whether man is more powerful than the sun.  

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
Re: The psychology of climate change

Strabes my friend,

It doesn't really matter. Our plate runneth over with problems. We're killing ourselves in more than enough other ways.

Mike

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

What happened to Acid Rain from the coal fired power plants killing the trees, or the hole in the ozone layer from the cfc's?  Here in the south it's the pine beetle, because the trees are weakened somehow. People who claim they know what's happening, and that it's a single easy fix, ie just quit driving cars and turn off the power plants.  I just have trouble believing.

Sorry.

I wish the fix was so easy.

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 2738
Re: The psychology of climate change

docmims

Acid rain has been reduced, not eliminated, because discharges from coal power plants in the midwest have been cleaned up by (wait for it) cap and trade.  Gasp, the horror, we'll bankrupt all those poor fossil fuel burners.  The ozone hole has been reduced, not eliminated, because CFC's were banned.  Those were relatively easy fixes.  Eliminated the CO2 and CH4 we keep injecting into the atmosphere is much much more difficult, particularly because the professional denialists have convinced so many of you that AGW isn't a problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain

Quote:
Meanwhile, in 1990, the US Congress passed a series of amendments to the Clean Air Act. Title IV of these amendments established the Acid Rain Program, a cap and trade system designed to control emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. Title IV called for a total reduction of about 10 million tons of SO2 emissions from power plants. It was implemented in two phases. Phase I began in 1995, and limited sulfur dioxide emissions from 110 of the largest power plants to a combined total of 8.7 million tons of sulfur dioxide One power plant in New England (Merrimack) was in Phase I. Four other plants (Newington, Mount Tom, Brayton Point, and Salem Harbor) were added under other provisions of the program. Phase II began in 2000, and affects most of the power plants in the country.

During the 1990s, research has continued. On March 10, 2005, EPA issued the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). This rule provides states with a solution to the problem of power plant pollution that drifts from one state to another. CAIR will permanently cap emissions of SO2 and NOx in the eastern United States. When fully implemented, CAIR will reduce SO2 emissions in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia by over 70 percent and NOx emissions by over 60 percent from 2003 levels.[14]

Overall, the Program's cap and trade program has been successful in achieving its goals. Since the 1990s, SO2 emissions have dropped 40%, and according to the Pacific Research Institute, acid rain levels have dropped 65% since 1976.[15][16]

In 2007, total SO2 emissions were 8.9 million tons, achieving the program's long term goal ahead of the 2010 statutory deadline.[17]

The EPA estimates that by 2010, the overall costs of complying with the program for businesses and consumers will be $1 billion to $2 billion a year, only one fourth of what was originally predicted.[15]

strabes's picture
strabes
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 7 2009
Posts: 1032
Re: The psychology of climate change

Mike, that's true.  Doesn't really matter given the profound problems we have across the board.  But I'm solidly opposed to the globalist agenda, and since they're using AGW as one of their key methods to move us toward UN government and lock us down under fines, fees, laws, taxes, inspections while they get even more rich from it, I'm going to fight it.  I know a lot of people on CM.com get tired of me and others talking about this, in fact some no doubt support that agenda, so I understand I'm probably in the minority. 

Doc, some issues were/are real and I was all for fixing them, but now it's all ignored and it's just about Gore's prophecy...I'm not joining his church.

foote2777's picture
foote2777
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 30 2008
Posts: 65
Re: The psychology of climate change

It is very hard to support climate change policy making when the politicians can't be trusted, the celebrities can't be trusted, the media can't be trusted. and many of the scientist can't be trusted. The problem is that the result of most policies is that the elite will profit from it, and the average person will lose their way of life.

The mention of Al Gore makes me sick, He is an absolute climate change fraud.

For the record, I'm convinced the climate is changing, convinced man has some negative effect. and convinced that we as humans should make changes to limit the effects and to adapt to the inevitable change already in process.

What I am not convinced by is that taxing the masses and creating a one world government is the solution.

there needs to be a major paradigm shift in global attitudes towards the earth, however, as positive as I would like to be, I just don't see it happening.

Jon

EndGamePlayer's picture
EndGamePlayer
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
Re: The psychology of climate change

Ditto with the Gore thing. He, of all people, should be watching how he lives, travels and engages with Mother Earth. It's a "do as I say - and not as I do" thing.

Ditto on the major changes on how we live and the faster the better. The "added benefits" to living in peace and harmony with Mother Earth is multi-fold. Better food, better health, better security. But the huge benefit no one wants to talk about when we transition - we're not giving up money to the big money players who have created this disaster, make wars, take our hard earned money and lie about it, and on. . .  EGP

jturbo68's picture
jturbo68
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 4 2009
Posts: 193
Re: The psychology of climate change

rhare wrote:

But, I don't think any of this matters.  We may be warming, we may be cooling, the right question to ask: "Is it caused by man?" and the more important question at the moment is to ask "Is it caused by man-made CO2?"  These questions are important because of the potential policy/legal/lifestyle changes we might make based on this data.  My take is that since 95% of all GHC (green house gases) are natural, that the far less than 5% we could actually change would have little/no impact.  Please see my posts on another forum topic started by DamTheMatrix.

Making the assumption above that 5% of Green House Gasses are human caused.

Given that CO2 concentrations have risen from 280 PPM to 390PPM over the past 150 years and average 2ppm increase per year. 

CO2 added to the atmosphere persists of centuries as it is slowly reabsorbed by earth processes. 

The addition is small, but persistent, over two centuries ..... it is not turning out to be insignificant.

It is simply another example of an exponential function running up against a physical limit imposed by our planet.

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

Doug wrote:

docmims

Acid rain has been reduced, not eliminated, because discharges from coal power plants in the midwest have been cleaned up by (wait for it) cap and trade.  Gasp, the horror, we'll bankrupt all those poor fossil fuel burners.  The ozone hole has been reduced, not eliminated, because CFC's were banned.  Those were relatively easy fixes. 

.[15]

I think they were easy fixes, because they fixed a problem that was a bit overstated.  That being said:  I am all for cleaning up the environment and decreasing output of pollutants.  However, I think the people running the environmental show have another agenda for political power and environmental issues are just their excuse.  I know you are genuinely concerned about the environment, and so am I.  But I"m not give up my freedom to algore and the world bank bunch over it.  Sorry.

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: The psychology of climate change

1) Because it's the one used by the control freaks to push their agenda toward global governance

Strabes, THAT is a load of utter nonsense!!!!!!!  I for one am TOTALLY against global governance, and so are all my acquaintances who are scared shiyless about the consequences of what we are doing to the climate.  It is the likes of YOU who is fear mongering, making people believe that "fixing" (which now can't even be done IMO) the problem is somehow going to destroy society and civilisation, when in fact the morons in charge are doing this just fine AND screwing the climate at the same time.......!!!!!!

Then someone else here says 95% of CO2 is natural.......  more codswallop!  Before the industrial revolution, CO2 levels were at 280 ppm, and now they're at 385 ppm, and simple maths tells me that 28%, (or nearly one third - and going up 0.5% a year, ie EXPONENTIALLY) are NOT natural. And they're seriously contemplating 450 ppm, making "unnatural" CO2 rise to 38%.....

If in 20 years time, when it will all be too late, we who push this are proved 100% right as I fully expect, will we be allowed/able to line all you deniers up against the wall and get our pound of flesh for the crimes you will have committed against the Earth and all its creatures (including us)?

strabes's picture
strabes
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 7 2009
Posts: 1032
Re: The psychology of climate change

You're falling right into the trap...they've set it up so their agenda can't be opposed.  

I'm not saying you're a control freak.  I'm saying royal families, bankers, Al Gore are.  I'm not saying I'm opposed to fixing our systems.  I'm saying I'm opposed to the globalist plan. And I never said I don't want to fix our problems because it will destroy civilization.  I think civilization will be destroyed as we know it regardless given the situation we find ourselves in.  I want to shift to local, sustainable community and let the empire die on the vine, as my guess is you do.  I don't want the empire to maintain control and start treating us the same way they treat chickens in corporate farms.  

Your last line is nazi-esque.  We're on the same side if you're opposed to global government and you just want to reinvent our way of life so we don't destroy the environment we live in, yet because I speak against the folks trying to stay on top and maintain control, you want to shoot me.  Sure...feel free to shoot me...if that's the way humans think nowadays I don't care to be here.  

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 2738
Re: The psychology of climate change

docmims

Quote:
However, I think the people running the environmental show have another agenda for political power and environmental issues are just their excuse.  I know you are genuinely concerned about the environment, and so am I.  But I"m not give up my freedom to algore and the world bank bunch over it.  Sorry.

I have never understood the obsession with Gore.  I don't care if he's Satan return to earth, he got the science about right and is one a few who are still fighting the fight.  Forget him, pay attention to the science.  Come up with solutions.  Push for them.  Unless you're in complete denial, you have to be aware that there are some pretty bad probable outcomes, and a certain amount of warming is already programmed into the system.

Doug

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

Well a couple dozen nuclear plants making electricity for electric cars would really cut our CO2 output, but I just don't get the sense that the environmental crowd is embracing that idea.  Also the get back to nature wood stove crowd is not helping lower our carbon footprint either.

I suppose you could say that the trees used for firewood are just recycling the CO2 in the atmosphere, but so is oceanic algae.  Yes the climate may change and some rainforests will become deserts, but some deserts will become rainforests.  The main determinate is Ocean current shifts from solar energy, not atmospheric temperature from heat retention by CO2.  I think atmospheric particulates (stratospheric in particular) are much more of an issue in climate change  than CO2.

Cloudfire's picture
Cloudfire
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Posts: 1813
Re: The psychology of climate change

Damnthematrix wrote:

If in 20 years time, when it will all be too late, we who push this are proved 100% right as I fully expect, will we be allowed/able to line all you deniers up against the wall and get our pound of flesh for the crimes you will have committed against the Earth and all its creatures (including us)?

Truly unbelievable . . . Is this the emotional endpoint of your viewpoint, DTM?  To hate your fellow man enough that you would murder him?  All I can do is shake my head . . .

Cloudfire's picture
Cloudfire
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Posts: 1813
Re: The psychology of climate change

strabes wrote:

Sure...feel free to shoot me...if that's the way humans think nowadays I don't care to be here.  

What have we come to?

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

Strabes.  I think you have found that environmentalism is a form of religion.  Do not challege the dogma of global warming or you will be tortured and killed by the enlightened defenders of the earth.  Tongue out

Way back when, I got my undergraduate degree in Marine Science.  I studied under a Swedish guy who had helped to prove that sand drifted down the coast of North America from north to south(which is true).  He also presented a paper with very elegant calculations about where one of our local Islands in South Carolina was going to split in two due to rising sea levels, opening a new coastal inlet.  Every huge storm he would drive by to see if his prediction had come true. I wish I had bought those lots back then very cheaply due to his dire prediction, because they are still there 35years later.  I would have made several million fiat dollars.Tongue out

BTW matrix.  I am a big environmentalist at heart.  I just use some common sense and don't believe everything a grant writing scientist tells me..

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

edit: sorry double clicked on post

plato1965's picture
plato1965
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 18 2009
Posts: 615
Re: The psychology of climate change

I came across global warming while I was a physics student in 1990.. then I took it seriously, but sceptically....

Now... my best guess is that it's a cover story.. for peak oil..      ie  an anthropogenic red herring... (tm)

So while I have huge problems with the "science"... (always sceptical and open... never authoritative and "settled")

I have no problems whatsoever with the solutions.... because they match (*) the solutions to peak oil and sustainability.....

* --  Except for carbon capture.. if I'm right.. that's basically irrelevant... not a terrible idea.... just not pressing and urgent..  I hope.

If I go into totally paranoid mode... then maybe peak oil is anthropogenic and managed... but maybe for noble reasons....   ( we certainly have far more control over oil extraction than we do climate. )

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: The psychology of climate change

Damnthematrix wrote:

1) Because it's the

If in 20 years time, when it will all be too late, we who push this are proved 100% right as I fully expect, will we be allowed/able to line all you deniers up against the wall and get our pound of flesh for the crimes you will have committed against the Earth and all its creatures (including us)?

depends on whether you want the pound barbecued or raw?  how about witches? can we burn some witches too?  can we torture some hunters for crimes again the earths creatures?  those darn christians too, always keeping the muslim man down.  who else can we hate?  get a life dude.

GregSchleich's picture
GregSchleich
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 16 2009
Posts: 187
Re: The psychology of climate change

Damnthematrix wrote:

1) Because it's the one used by the control freaks to push their agenda toward global governance

Strabes, THAT is a load of utter nonsense!!!!!!!  I for one am TOTALLY against global governance, and so are all my acquaintances who are scared shiyless about the consequences of what we are doing to the climate.  It is the likes of YOU who is fear mongering, making people believe that "fixing" (which now can't even be done IMO) the problem is somehow going to destroy society and civilisation, when in fact the morons in charge are doing this just fine AND screwing the climate at the same time.......!!!!!!

Mike,

I'm not nearly as convinced as Strabes is of the fallacy of AGW.  I certainly find it believable that there's an anthropogenic component to the problem. To me that seems consistent with all the other environmental havoc humans are universally acknowledged to be causing. I'm also not quite as confident as Strabes in making pronouncements about a specific agenda in the offing, either (I always have trouble confidently distinguishing stupidity and unintended consequences from conspiracy), but to his larger point, that this is ultimately about control freakery and a larger agenda that has nothing to do with the well being of the planet, I agree completely. 

I would assume that 99% of the people worried about climate change are well intentioned, often well informed, and have good reason to be alarmed. The problem is, they're not in charge.  The people in charge are the people you refer to as the "morons," who have been destroying society and civilization. That's what worries people like Strabes and me.  And if you believe your own words - that "fixing" the problem "now can't even be done," then what's their motivation? Doesn't it make sense to be questioning their agenda?  

Quote:

If in 20 years time, when it will all be too late, we who push this are proved 100% right as I fully expect, will we be allowed/able to line all you deniers up against the wall and get our pound of flesh for the crimes you will have committed against the Earth and all its creatures (including us)?

Don't blame us. We're not the problem. Why should it matter whether we acknowledge AGW or not? All of us here are among the very few who are actually proposing meaningful action which could mitigate climate change and resource depletion, regardless of our position on AGW. We're the ones who want to get rid of the debt based monetary system, which obviously is at the very core of our hopeless addiction to exponential growth. Do you think that's going to be on the table at Copenhagen next month? ... Of course not. Growth is their top priority. They want to have growth AND climate change mitigation at the same time - a perfect recipe for Jevon's paradox. They will accomplish nothing.

Greg

r's picture
r
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 2 2008
Posts: 262
Re: The psychology of climate change

The only way to do something locally about pollution in general is to return to a more primitive state.  Turn off the cars, close down the factories and power stations.

The forest precedes man, the desert follows him.

Under the pavement, the beach!

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
Re: The psychology of climate change

r:

The only way to do something locally about pollution in general is to return to a more primitive state.  Turn off the cars, close down the factories and power stations.

The forest precedes man, the desert follows him.

Under the pavement, the beach!

Well said.

Is there something wrong with worshipping nature? We've become so detached from it and everything else of real worth. Have you ever tried to reason with someone under the influence of a cult? In our case it would be the cult of perpetual-growth in a finite world. The only world the cult members understand, relate to, and believe in is that which they have constructed for themselves -- concrete and steel, asphalt and astroturf, supermarkets and shopping malls, ipods and pc's.

What do we worship?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments