Confessions of a Climate Change Denier

grainfedpraiboy

Electoral Member
Mar 15, 2009
715
1
18
Alberta The Last Best West
A long time ago I was a climate change denier. I regurgitated all kinds of studies, quotes and facts from the internet to support my opinion that the world climate was not changing and if it were; well then by golly it was any number of other natural factors because clearly climate has been occurring since the Earth formed and will continue to do so long after man is extinct.

I've changed my mind 180 degrees and freely admit it and unlike other converts, don't pretend I've always felt this way. To be clear there was no brilliant scientific thesis or argument that had me writhing in the grasp of reason though I credit the old TPA Stony Tony with laying much of the foundation for my opening of the mind to scientific rather than political evidence.

I changed my opinion because of good old fashioned common sense which boils down to these three considerations:

1. Science, journalism and prit'near everything else is being drawn along political or religious lines these days. I don't like it but it is the way it is and this entrenching of camps and ideologies probably at least in part has something to do with the internet, the spread of information of all truths and falsehoods and the new found desire to protect our own truths over listening to others.

Having said that, when 97% of global eggheads proclaim anthropogenic climate change as certain fact how am I any less deliberately ignorant than the Pakistanis who murder polio vaccination workers because they know it is a plot to sterilise Muslims or the faked moon landing/911 was an inside job according to conspiracy theorists who know the government is misleading the people.

How can I chastise Holocaust deniers for ignoring or dismissing historical facts if I do it with climate change? How can I cite scientific reports when debating lefties on the safety of GMO foods when I dismiss the same government and university research centers while the liberals ironically in turn dismiss the 9 out of 10 scientific consensus of safety of the GMO food?

Am I seriously supposed to pretend it is fact that God plopped us down here in Her image and ignore the anthropological evidence to the contrary simply because so many people believe in Santa they want to kill you or condemn you to eternal damnation for suggesting otherwise?

I know enough now to know I don't know squat and need to rely on those who do due to research and not those who think they do due to political ideology. At 97% of the scientific community you'll never get a higher consensus period.

2. If you have even a rudimentary knowledge of science you are aware that most researchers believe we have entered the Anthropocene. This means that mankind now has the greatest impact on shaping the planet and this should scare the **** out of you if you care about anyone more than your own selfish ***.

From species extinction to changing the landscape with our bridges, mining, and dams to influencing evolution as we see urban rodents increase intelligence, spiders develop different vision and bird wingspans shorten to adapt to urban flight. We have taken whole forests and turned them to farmland. We have burned giant holes in the ozone layer and altered more than half the surface of the planet and the oceans soak up so much CO2 they are changing PH and becoming sterile while human activity accounts for 2x more soil movement than natural erosion, wind, earthquakes etc. We can bring back species from extinction and will create the next dominate species on this planet.

Few would dispute the above impact man has had on the environment yet large enough groups of people are so deliberately ignorant or ideologically blind they believe our effects on the planet end at it's climate. Well city boy, let me tell you it is 5-7 degrees colder at night outside the city in winter and about 1-3 degrees warmer in summer during the day in my neck of the woods so I don't need satellites and charts to know large groups of people impact the climate.

3. Things have changed. Weather has changed. Animals have changed. You see, if you put down your Xbox and talk with the elders they will tell you of periods of hot or cold that lasted decades or dry spells and wet spells that went on longer than normal. Decades with lots of snow and years with almost no snow so nothing unusual there agreed.

However, nowhere in the oral record of the elders, no where in the recent scientific record, no where in the record of the pioneers do we see the movement of animals to areas where those animals never existed before or plants and insects that were never seen in these latitudes ever suddenly now appearing. Things are changing and it's not just the loss of biodiversity I have witnessed in my own life. It's migratory patterns and fauna out of whack beyond the oral traditions of the elders.

Climate change denial seems to be a mostly conservative urban thing in my opinion. These folks live in sterile urban/suburban environments where changes in weather, animals and biodiversity have little impact on their lives. I've noticed most rural Conservatives, those closer to nature such as farmers and trappers are far more concerned about climate change and few of them believe it is part of a natural cycle or simply not occurring.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Climate Change Debate (HBO) - YouTube
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
... I credit the old TPA Stony Tony with laying much of the foundation for my opening of the mind to scientific rather than political evidence.
I'll second that. It's not that I didn't grasp that the climate was changing, I could tell that, I questioned the drivers. I still think it's a matter of multiple drivers as opposed to just one.

For me now though, it's more like why I hate Kiss, their fans. Pro AGW types, for the most part, are goofs.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
I just don't believe that it marks the beginning of the end. Yup, it's happening. Yup, some species won't survive, the human race will.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
According to the truthers the Arctic was to be ice free about 8 years ago. Didn't happen yet. Despite all the dire predictions there has been no warming for quite a few years and now in a desperate act of cover up the truthers are calling it the great pause. Carbon tax and trading is another giant scam to take money from the developed countries and give it to those that are not very productive when if there was in fact human caused global warming that money would be much better used to clean up emissions here.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
According to the truthers the Arctic was to be ice free about 8 years ago. Didn't happen yet. Despite all the dire predictions there has been no warming for quite a few years and now in a desperate act of cover up the truthers are calling it the great pause. Carbon tax and trading is another giant scam to take money from the developed countries and give it to those that are not very productive when if there was in fact human caused global warming that money would be much better used to clean up emissions here.





Global warming is a misnomer. Climate change is more accurate.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
According to the truthers the Arctic was to be ice free about 8 years ago. Didn't happen yet. Despite all the dire predictions there has been no warming for quite a few years and now in a desperate act of cover up the truthers are calling it the great pause. Carbon tax and trading is another giant scam to take money from the developed countries and give it to those that are not very productive when if there was in fact human caused global warming that money would be much better used to clean up emissions here.

What I find so incongruent on the topic of AGW (climate change, etc, ad nauseum) is that the truthers demand it is happening and (deliberately) ignore the only solution to their dilemma... The problem is not in the form of the anthro emissions (assuming that is factual and accurate) but the number of emitters kicking into the system.

The AGW/CC crowd would clearly understand that IF their theory is correct, the best and only real course of action is to cull the human race and reduce the number of active emitters into the equation.

Instead, their proposal is to affect as many bank transfers as possible and funnel the cash (less the admin costs of course) to developing nations for the purpose of sustaining and growing those populations.

Obviously, this perpetuates the crisis and the ongoing 'solution' is higher taxes


Global warming is a misnomer. Climate change is more accurate.


They were so certain on Global Warming.... It was an irrefutable fact then.

Now it's Climate Change, another irrefutable fact.

To this day, I have no discernible definition of exactly what climate change is and the substantive relationship(s) it has with anthro contributions... To me it's like identifying that the tides rise and fall (have been forever) and now, magically without any explanation - it's because of anthro sources and only a tax can save the planet
 

El Barto

les fesses a l'aire
Feb 11, 2007
5,959
66
48
Quebec
I just don't believe that it marks the beginning of the end. Yup, it's happening. Yup, some species won't survive, the human race will.
If it survives it will be a selected and a lucky few.
When you hear about the dying bees due to pesticides and the lack of pollination, we are shooting ourselves in the foot.
This is one example of man's meddling that we are becoming aware of. Now imagine all the things we are not aware of.

Love your insight Grain :thumbup:
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
If it survives it will be a selected and a lucky few.
When you hear about the dying bees due to pesticides and the lack of pollination, we are shooting ourselves in the foot.
This is one example of man's meddling that we are becoming aware of. Now imagine all the things we are not aware of.

Love your insight Grain :thumbup:




ROFLMFAO...oh ya..... mass extinction, the human race won't last another 20 years...... heard it more times than I can count since the 60's. All bullshyte for the terminally stupid. Send your donations to Save the world, box 100, give me all your money u.s.a.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Let's burn the whole planet down. Once there is nothing left. Let's find a way to go to a other one

We are world eaters
 

grainfedpraiboy

Electoral Member
Mar 15, 2009
715
1
18
Alberta The Last Best West
According to the truthers.............

I'm not picking on you in particular but rather your kind. And what is your kind?

Your kind are the type cut from the same cloth as the anti oil fanatics who stubbornly use the term "tarsands" instead of oil sands or Frankenfood instead of GM as part of the propaganda of language and it won't matter what evidence is presented because their position is one based on an absolute faith in ideology rather than an understanding of science.

Debating a guy like you on climate change would be like debating MHz on whether god exists.

And lets face it, science really means nothing to the vast majority of us who are laymen at best. We need to trust in the researchers who do this for a living. Now the researchers who actually know what is going on, well, better than 97% are in agreement that climate change is anthropogenic in nature and that it is currently occurring. Contrast that with about 95% of doctors who believe that smoking causes lung cancer. Do we believe the 5% who think tobacco is safe and keep right on smoking? Up until the late 1980s we did.

The debate over tobacco and lung cancer was a very similar debate and anyone over the age of 45 will easily recall the parallels of an overwhelming group of independent researchers from government, universities and hospitals producing studies and all concluding smoking was harmful while a fringe group of researchers produced all sorts of evidence to the contrary.

So yes, your 95 year old grandmother smoked two packs a day from the time she was seven and wasn't sick a day in her life and there are variations in the climate change models as researchers learn more about our environment and the different inputs. Take a step back from your politics and try some common sense.
 

grainfedpraiboy

Electoral Member
Mar 15, 2009
715
1
18
Alberta The Last Best West
I'll second that. It's not that I didn't grasp that the climate was changing, I could tell that, I questioned the drivers. I still think it's a matter of multiple drivers as opposed to just one.

For me now though, it's more like why I hate Kiss, their fans. Pro AGW types, for the most part, are goofs.

I think the majority of people who understand the climate is changing and the ecosystem is under duress tend to agree that no single culprit can be fingered specifically and that there are many variables.

Let's look at beekeeping as an example. Now every year it is getting harder to keep bees. There are so many things attacking the colonies now from natural disease to neonics (pesticides embedded in the plant itself) that no one really knows for sure what is causing colony collapse disorder.

Are the bees weak from monoculture and more susceptible to disease then they were? Is it the proliferation of cell phone towers and wireless routers interferring with their rythems? Is it the neonicotinoids they are banning in Europe? Is it the climate changes? Is it something else? A combination of things? There are better than 50 theories I've come across but you get the point.

Know one knows for sure what is causing CCD but what we do know for sure is the bees are suffering and globally we lose about 25% of colonies each year and we also know that ultimately it is mankind who is cocking things up. The exact same thing is going on with the environment and the climate. We are to blame, we know it is occurring we just haven't fully established all the details.

On a side note, I tried a biodynamic apiary in one of the yards for 5 years and have given up this fall. I have concluded the environment I live in is so toxic now that bees cannot survive without direct human intervention. I can think off no bigger wake up call then that.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
According to the truthers the Arctic was to be ice free about 8 years ago.

yes, there have been predictions made as to when/if the Arctic will become ice-free. Some predictions have no standing/merit simply based on who has made them. What's a truther and who/what do you assert made that prediction you're holding out as something, apparently, of significance.

I think the majority of people who understand the climate is changing and the ecosystem is under duress tend to agree that no single culprit can be fingered specifically and that there are many variables.

I have concluded the environment I live in is so toxic now that bees cannot survive without direct human intervention. I can think off no bigger wake up call then that.

or mountain pine-beetle damage
 

grainfedpraiboy

Electoral Member
Mar 15, 2009
715
1
18
Alberta The Last Best West
or mountain pine-beetle damage

From the little I know about the MPB it's explosive growth is directly linked to a warmer environment where we don't get the weeks long -30 or lower which used to kill the majority of the eggs and keep the numbers in check.

MPB is just one more of a thousand ways we are indirectly cocking things up.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
From the little I know about the MPB it's explosive growth is directly linked to a warmer environment where we don't get the weeks long -30 or lower which used to kill the majority of the eggs and keep the numbers in check.

MPB is just one more of a thousand ways we are indirectly cocking things up.

I spend a fair amount of time hiking in the mountains; to me, nothing could be more indicative of AGW impacts than the damage done by mountain pine-beetles.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
What I find so incongruent on the topic of AGW (climate change, etc, ad nauseum) is that the truthers demand it is happening and (deliberately) ignore the only solution to their dilemma... The problem is not in the form of the anthro emissions (assuming that is factual and accurate) but the number of emitters kicking into the system.

That's poppy cock. If everyone emitted the same amount, well you still wouldn't have a case for there being only one solution. Because increasing efficiency of say, gas mileage in cars would have the same effect as removing emitters. Total emissions go down. Or rather than calling them the number of emitters, let's call your solution what it is, population control. If you think it's the only solution, that's pretty foolish.

A real incongruity I've noticed is that the efficacy of any proposed solution never really gets discussed. Unlike other foreign policy issues, where there's lots of different opinions, this topic tends to get distilled down to the same old talking points, every time. If you have some percentage that flat outright believes that human contribution is a lie, obviously they won't be a meaningful part of that discussion at all. As for proposed solutions, there's lots of them. My personal favourite is the wedge stabilization proposed a number of years ago now.

Because it's not one solution, it's many, so it gives lots of different options. Some countries would be able to do more in some categories than others. Doesn't matter with this concept.
 

grainfedpraiboy

Electoral Member
Mar 15, 2009
715
1
18
Alberta The Last Best West
I spend a fair amount of time hiking in the mountains; to me, nothing could be more indicative of AGW impacts than the damage done by mountain pine-beetles.

Which kinda helps prove my point that people who spend their lives in suburbs and are not really connected with the natural environment beyond a trip a couple times a year to a friends lake lot see AGW as a bunch of BS. But the folks who farm, hunt, hike and explore the remaining natural areas are seeing the first effects and things like MPB are the proverbial canary in the coal mine.

Here's a song you might enjoy.

The Truth Comes Out - Corb Lund - YouTube

I just don't believe that it marks the beginning of the end. Yup, it's happening. Yup, some species won't survive, the human race will.

It's actually the end of the beginning of the end. As far as i can tell things are already too late. But irrespective of climate humanity will not survive our technology. Already 70% of a human being can be replaced from artificial limbs and synthetic blood to pacemakers and computerised eyes an ears. It is a matter of time before we transition into something entirely different from what we are today as part of the "natural" process of human evolution.