someguy3So what are the climate change denialists in your life saying right now?
I don’t have climate change denialists in my life. That’s usually indicative of other beliefs and values that don’t jive with mine, and we end up being incompatible as friends.
ScrubblesIt’s all a hoax, it’s not a big deal, it’s just hot out.
My family is from Iowa, where they’ve had record breaking storms 3 out of the last 5 years, heat waves lasting longer than ever in history, record cold, and to top it off, wildfire smoke for the first time ever. (Note that this is after they made fun of Cali for being Cali and being on fire). No, none of these events have registered as connected in any way.
Nothing will ever convince these people. They are immune to evidence and argument.
logic will never convince them because they aren’t arguing from a position of logic. It’s about conforming to the beliefs required to be part of their tribe and/or protecting themselves from coming to terms with the harsh realities of climate change. It’s reactionary against a challenge to their beliefs.
You would need to first convince them to consider that their respected authorities could be wrong. But within this reactionary mindset, being wrong is disgraceful. So unless they lose respect for their leaders or manage to shift away from believing fallibility is disgraceful, I don’t know if they can be convinced.
UID_ZeroYou can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.
This may be one of the most insightful things I’ve ever read or heard.
It’s attributed to Jonathan Swift, 1721
Awesome, thank you!
Perhaps if you could separate them from their social group long enough. Send them on a three-month trip, preferably to another country. Have them spend most of their time with people who deal with these problems on a daily basis.
convince them to consider that their respected authorities could be wrong.
That’s kind of why I’m asking, the month long heat wave should be an opening.
I think you’d need to start by getting them to admit that the heat is a problem without mentioning climate change. Don’t use any of the buzz words they’ve been taught how to respond to. Just try to get them to have a conversation where they have to come up with their own answers.
In fact, maybe don’t even start off with anything related to the topics they’ve been told what to think about. Ask about something they care about more directly that isn’t on their party’s agenda. You’d need to keep at it long enough for them to start understanding you’re not their enemy, which could be anywhere from a few hours to a few weeks/months, depending on how deeply entrenched they are. Then, start trying to work towards the lesser issues their authority doesn’t bring up often but has expressed an opinion on. Basically, you need to de-indoctrinate them.
If you can get them to talk about an issue without recognizing immediately that they’re in danger of contradicting their chosen authorities, then slowly transition towards getting them to talk about more and more “dangerous” topics, you might help them to bridge that disconnect and start thinking critically about the key issues.
That all said, You’ll have an easier time working with people who haven’t been deeply entrenched in an authoritarian ideology. The less developed their beliefs, the easier it’ll be to guide them towards thinking about their beliefs critically. That’s one reason it’s so important to teach critical thinking in primary/secondary schools.
Nope. Many have had the urge to ask questions literally beaten out of them in their youth.
Worse. I think many are immune to observation.
Right on par with the old, “Hurr durr of course it’s hot, it’s July!!!1!1!!1!” comments. These are the same folks who, when faced with a polar vortex in December or January, proudly and obnoxiously crow about “global warming.”
Their tiny brains just can’t comprehend the difference between weather and climate. I have had meager success explaining that climate change results in worse extremes, colds get colder,hots get hotter, and storms get stronger, but even then it’s only some of them that actually listen. The rest are like “I’ve got it allllll figured out” and refuse to listen, then drive off in their 0.7mpg Ford Tahoe Super Manly Man Maker to go to the grocery store 8 blocks away.
It’s the hottest July in recorded history. Likely the hottest for tens of thousands of years. There hasn’t been below average temperatures since the eighties, no not even that winter that you thought was quite cold at the time. Polar vortices are supposed to happen at, you know, the poles.
maybe if you can convince them that global warming helps out joe biden they will be against it.
You see it’s a conspiracy, Sleepy Joe wants us to keep using fossil fuels so the liberals will vote him back it so it looks like he’s doing something! The last thing he wants is for us to stop using fossil fuels! I bought an EV today just to spite him
tallwookiemost electric plants use coal or natural gas. EV isnt any “cleaner” than a small gas engine.
We’re on nuclear, solar, and hydro where I am, something like 90-95% of my energy is clean. Demand your local energy go green!
The biggest difference is even when using dirty energy source electrice vehicles are more efficient at using the electricity from the dirty sources than gas engines are at burning gasoline directly
They’ve run the numbers a long time ago. Even using the dirtiest electricity state in the US, EVs come out ahead of combustion engines. And we’ve come a long ways since then too.
“Why don’t you call anymore?”
My dad: “the earth goes through natural temperature cycles, I’ve got some good scientific sources who say it’s all natural and climate change is just scaremongering”
Guess that’s another topic along with the EU, immigration, COVID, vaccination that I can’t talk about with my family.
Makes it hard and frustrating to continue to have a relationship at times.
“Amazing dad, do these cycles usually happen in the span of a lifetime?” I don’t expect you to say that, I already know his answer. It’s whatever Fox News told him to say
Oh I did. He just has “evidence from reliable sources” to say it’s all a hoax.
Max_PowerI do not have climate change deniers as friends because idiots cannot be my friend.
By now it’s pretty obvious what is happening and what probably will happen. The ones unable to understand will inevitably have a hard time and a lower chance of passing on their genes which is fine by me.
Hi I’m an idiot and would like to be your friend
mitchTHEY SAID NO!!! GET LOST
You wanna be friends?
Yes absolutely. I need a second to get through Zombies Ate My Neighbors.
Link.wav [he/him]As an idiot, I welcome idiots to be my friends
but idiots can be self aware enough to know their limitations and when to defer to experts
Idiots who think they know everything are the worst. Even we idiots don’t want to be associated with them.
Understanding has nothing to do with a person’s chances of survival or their children’s chances. The biggest determinants will be wealth/poverty and location. Plenty of ordinary people who understand perfectly well what’s going on will suffer and die, while fools who can buy their way to a safer place will survive.
LibertyLizardDon’t know any anymore. I am a passionate debater and educator on climate science so I either convince them or they distance themself from me.
Same as 20 years ago — “the fact that they want me to give up my truck and Nestle gets to dump plastic in the ocean proves it’s all liberal bullshit.”
U ´꓃ ` U
Truly the american way. What? Give up a tiny bit of convenience to help other people?? Freedom! Liberty!
The true arrogance of the average American is driving their big pickup and thinking they deserve to destroy the planet.
So how can climate change be real and the overwhelming majority of emissions be from production and the solution be to cut emissions at the point of consumption where an incredible minority of those emissions are?
Friendly reminder that it’s not about denial anymore. It’s about how urgent is the existential threat of tipping points and how radical and fast should we act.
One side says, let’s stay reasonable, let’s not hurt the economy, don’t panic because of the these crazy Greta maniacs. Source: We managed a lot of crisis in the past, sometimes it’s not that hot, lobby money.
The other side says we have to hit the breaks immediately or a lot of people are going to die. Source: Science.
What are you basing the existential threat claim on? I don’t think I’ve heard a credible scientist ever claim it’s going to end our specie. The yearly excess deaths estimates I’ve heard vary from few hundred thousand to couple million a year in 2050 - 2100.
People are already dying because of the heat or starving because of droughts and water scarcity. Based on the IPCC report it will become even worse, especially of we don’t manage to avoid the tipping points of the climate crisis in the next few years.
On top of that, people
I haven’t denied any of that
(Sorry, English is not my first language)
If I understand you correctly you criticize my usage of the word existential, bc it implies that the climate catastrophe will kill all humans? If yes, then I have to correct myself. While this could be a possible outcome, it’s not based on actual research.
DerKriegsNah, existential is spot on
Related to existence
Seems all too apropos in this context.
While your numbers, if factual (no source posted), are statistically correct (in that it won’t make our species go extinct), you have to remember a simple fact: those numbers represent individual human lives. Family, friends, neighbors, your pizza guy, etc. Pretty brutal to be so flippant about.
Also, this doesn’t take into account the potential for cascading environmental system failures that could be caused by such warming. These unknowns could greatly change the equation.
I realize you are mainly arguing the point in response to “existential threats” being bandied about, but it’s a weird stance to take here.
It’s a real issue and actions needs to be taken to prevent the worst case scenario but I find it not useful when people extraggerate the dangers of it. It makes people suspicious about what other things we’re being misled about.
Source for those stats is chatGPT so take it with a grain of salt. The
Thanks for the solid source! I do understand the need for keeping the discussion real, but the article clearly states,
…concluded that to avert catastrophic health impacts and prevent millions of climate change-related deaths…
Sounds pretty existential to me, at a scale we have never experienced.
Sure. I’m in no way against fighting the climate change and under no illusion that it’s not going to affect the lives of billions of people and will lead to probably tens of millions of unecessary deaths. It’s a true crisis.
I just personally get irritated when people talk about it as if an asteroid is heading towards earth and is going to wipe out us all. It’s unproductive and causes extreme anxiety to many (especially young) people who don’t know better and it’s also free ammunition for climate change deniers to point out how “the libs lie about this too” etc.
That anxiety bit is too true, it has me fairly despondent when I think about it too long. It’s fair assertion you make, for sure.
Exactly - it is your duty to question the Government and the scientists that work for them. Lets be honest, the Govt’s track record for truth is a tad suspect and thats being extra nice. As I said earlier, the alarmists have been selling this to us(or trying to) in differently wrapped packages now for several decades. Even back in the 1970’s there were hysterical claims being made. None of it came anywhere close to being true. So, logically, people question it.
More importantly, people question the mitigation tactics which seem to only affect the lower/middle classes directly. Another tough thing for the average Joe to swallow.
There are definitely worse scenarios. The worst I know states that most parts of the world will be uninhabitable by humans and estimate that there will be 1-1.5 billion survivors by the end of the century. So, end of our species? No, just too damn close for comfort.
Can you elaborate on the “hit the brakes immediately” or we’re all going to die statement? What “Science” backs this claim up? Legit science please, not from agenda-laden website.
The IPCC report is what you‘re looking for! And since it‘s it‘s almost impossible to even reach the goal of 1,5 degrees, we should hit the breaks better sooner than later. It‘s not an „oopsie“ problem we would face otherwise. People are already dying.
No - Im not looking for anything, actually. I just would prefer that those that chest-thump about this stuff would walk the talk and take a “lead”. But they refuse. “Let the little cretins” pay more for energy, suffer with massive inconveniences and disrupt our way of life which the pretty folks go on as is. Nah, cant do it. Sorry.
It was an abnormally cold and wet winter. Climate deniers here are basically saying “shit happens”
FARTYSHARTBLASTNo idea, I’ve either changed their minds or stopped talking to them.
I have expelled them so I do not know.
kroldenI never really knew anyone that would straight up deny science. I mean i’ve met people before that are that stupid but they were never in my life.
NeilMost of them at this point are no longer deniers, but they have moved the goalposts as expected. They now claim global warming is real, but that it has nothing to do with humans and is a natural cycle of the planet. They fully accept it’s real, but fully deny we have anything to do with it.
I thought this was basically their stance the whole time. People thought it wasn’t real at all?
The Bard in GreenI had a coworker ten fifteen years ago who said basically “God’s doing it and it’s a sign of the end times.” This dude was a trained engineer.