Climate Deniers. No Need to Comment

April 19, 2017

CNN interview.


20 Responses to “Climate Deniers. No Need to Comment”

  1. Well, it’s just sad. The old: scientists are in it for the grant money. Was that a Frank Luntz idea?

    Just sad. Just really sad.

  2. And, I’m 62, and I know damned well the climate has changed a lot since I was a child. I’m from southern Illinois and in the winter of 2011-12, I stood outside in the wind at night on New Year’s Eve, wearing a t-shirt and flip flops. That was unthinkable even 10 years ago. If someone had told me it was going to be possible, I would have laughed at them.

    • For Marion, IL, that was a hot New Year’s eve. In subsequent New Year’s eves, the temp was 20 to 30 degrees colder.

      Don’t know the difference between an unusual weather even and climate, do you?

    • neilrieck Says:

      I’m 64 living in southern Ontario, Canada. When I was a kid, I remember the snow being really deep and the winters lasting a whole lot longer than now. There used to be a large snowmobile industry around here but that seems to have petered-out around 1980 (sure, you can still buy snowmobiles but there are no local dealers anymore; so seeing them on snowmobile trailers is a rarer sight these days). It has been touch-and-go at the local ski resorts in the past ten years. If it gets cold enough the resorts can make snow but this becomes problematic if it doesn’t stay cold. So it should be no surprise that one very large near-by resort called Blue Mountain in Collingwood Ontario didn’t open this year. I am not joking when I tell you that the resort operator was seen installing water slides etc. in previous years as they permanently shift their primary business season from winter to summer.

      But we must remember that this current warming cycle is responsible for the end of the ice age ~ 11,000 years ago where CO2 levels rose from 180 ppm to 280 ppm. That second value was more-or-less the norm until the Victorian Age brought us steam-based locomotives, and it was all up-hill (CO2-wise) from there.

  3. Mike Male Says:

    If I were an unscrupulous scientist in it for the money, I’d make more money from denial. Big business has more to spend than my university tenure would ever provide…. just saying.

    • webej Says:

      There’s exponentially more money on the denial side, especially if you can crank out stuff with some similitude to actual science.

  4. Kiwiiano Says:

    I suspect the rebuttal to “They’re all in it for the money” is to ask how the hell you could get thousands of scientists in dozens of different disciplines, all of whom have careers that can stand or fall on proving their colleagues wrong, can lockstep for decades without ANYONE, ANYWHERE, EVER blowing the whistle. And that would involve fudging data right across all those different disciplines so the errors introduced match up.

    Especially as anyone actually proving all their colleagues wrong would be a sitter for a bushel of Nobel Prizes.

    Anyone who can look you in the eye and claim that is either abysmally ignorant or getting kickbacks themselves

  5. mboli Says:

    Thank you for this video. It is discouraging. But it is helpful to know how they think.

    • webej Says:

      Their approach is great. They cured me of my fear of possible thermonuclear exchange between India and Pakistan or Israel and … I also now know that the San Andreas or the Cascadian faults are not actual problems. As for those periodic volacano episodes, most of them have not gone off in my lifetime. Phew!!!

      Feeling really really relieved.

      If I’ve never experienced it yet, it’s a sure thing that the chance of anything occuring drops to zero.

  6. This is sad on so many levels. First, because these individuals are awash in ignorance and complacency. But these kinds of interviews with man-on-the-street produce these things. Its purpose seems mainly to embarrass/belittle the conveyors of human ignorance. At some point, the journalist has to decide whether it’s in the public interest to provide a platform for uninformed chattering.

    Look, we are all blissfully ignorant about certain topics. I wouldn’t want a national journalist to stick a microphone in my face to ask about some topic I was unfamiliar with.

    The journalist could have asked the questions differently. The men lived in Louisiana and were fisherman. Couldn’t the questions have been about sea level rise, oil spills, weighing environmental harms vs. profit, protecting future generations.

    Let me give an example. “Scientists say that climate change will increase the frequency of Category 5 hurricanes. Some people say that the government should spend money to protect New Orleans and other cities. Other people say that reducing climate change will reduce flash flooding and the severity of hurricanes. Which strategy do you think should be done?”

  7. firstdano Says:

    These sort of folk are in the voting minority.



  8. Tom Bates Says:

    Sure a lot of people who seem to have an aversion to looking up the actual data. Here is an alternate take on warming that is interesting at least to me.

    These three graphs show the unadjusted and adjusted numbers.

    Maybe instead of going on about the weather on new years in Illinois one should look at the actual changes world wide.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: