A great question about climate change and a great response

[Kalis]

What science would that be?

Is statistics a science? Biology is. Some left wingers have a tendency to ignore the bits of those they don't like, just as some right wingers ignore the bits of science they don't like.

You are kind of fucked, as you are going to have to argue in defence of the honesty of politicians to argue against my point and that is never a position you want to put yourself in.

You can't even ask for science denial that all left wing politicians argue in favour of, as not all right wing politicians deny climate change science.

[s_bushido]

No.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

Educate yourself.

That article said exactly what I said. Fucking "educate myself," indeed.

[Kalis]

He asked for an example, you didn't give him an example.

Statistics itself isn't a science. It's a tool used by sciences.

They didn't ask for an example, they asked what science.

The left has their share of anti-vaxxers, something that whackjobs on the left and right agree on. Bipartisan nutjobbery.

[Malacrass]

Just finished watching it. What a fucking idiot.

Is he ?

[Ozyorkbourne]

Totally agree with Mr Milo.. cannot do anything about Climate change until India & China pull in their carbon outputs as well.

America has 1/3 the population of China, but 80% of their emissions, despite China being a rampant coal burning, emerging economy. If that doesn't strike you as odd and you conclude that no one can do anything, it's all China and India, then you either misinterpret data or are woefully ignorant on the topic.

China in fact, are slashing their emissions not least because of the serious health implications their emission smog is causing the population. They might not be humanitarians, but when it costs them economically, they pull their finger out.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Um...no?

The "myth" is that people hadn't figured out that the earth was round before the middle ages/Columbus.

I seriously don't get why people point to flat earth or an earth centered universe as if they're some kind of proof that climate science "could" be wrong. Both of those ideas were pushed by religious leaders, never academics. If anything, the climate change deniers are more akin in most ways to the flat earthers. Non-academic, very devout towards a religion... etc.

[DarkTZeratul]

What science would that be?

The people most strongly against vaccines and GMOs tend to be on the left.

[Malacrass]

I'm not sure what you're asking or why you bolded that particular sentence?

People are discussing and watching his videos. I wouldn't call someone who's making a small fortune by acting like an idiot... an idiot.

[Kujako]

The people most strongly against vaccines and GMOs tend to be on the left.

Yes... not sure what you think that proves. Stupid people are stupid, no matter which check box they mark on a ballot.

[Halyon]

This made my brain hurt. This vid was so damned dumb...

[Kalis]

An example of a science they deny...

It depends on the candidate and what their politicial agenda is. You have anti-vaxxers form the left, anti-GMO, anti-fracking, or whatever. All political sides have their science deniers.

"their share" isn't in any significant amount on the left for sure. Not sure about the right but I don't think it's a huge issue for either side as you said.

It is usually for political expediency (or nutjobs), political opportunism is a thing.

Most of the left doesn't consider the extreme left to actually be liberals anyway, cuz you know horseshoe theory. The far left people are typically more liberal about social policy but also super skeptical about sciences in general, usually these are the actual SWJs. Like the whole GMO conspiracy bullshit and all that. But the vast majority of democrats/left/liberals actually give some merit to the sciences unlike a good amount of the right.

No, you don't get to palm the far left off and anti-vaxxing is annoyingly mainstream, so you don't get to get to distance yourself from them either.

I can't stand this whole notion that you get to claim they aren't really on the same general side (left or right) if you don't like them.

Stalin was a left winger, Hitler was a right winger, Mao was left wing, Mussolini right wing, there you go, some bastards from history for both sides to deal with. The trick is to have a different brand of left/right wing politics to the psychos and that way you can admit that Stalin was a leftie without it reflecting poorly on you also being a leftie.

[Dug]

The people most strongly against vaccines and GMOs tend to be on the left.

GMOs maybe... anti vaxxers are overwhelmingly right idk what reality you're living in lol. But regardless we know they're all nutters right? Yet we're supposed to entertain the notions of climate change deniers lest they vote against us out of spite.

[Kalis]

Yes... not sure what you think that proves. Stupid people are stupid, no matter which check box they mark on a ballot.

The point was that science denial knows no political boundaries, denial of reality in the face of overwhelming evidence is a bipartisan issue.

[Kujako]

The point was that science denial knows no political boundaries, denial of reality in the face of overwhelming evidence is a bipartisan issue.

Difference being, the Democrats are not actually trying to ban GMO foods and vaccines. The republicans ARE trying to ban climate science.

[Ozyorkbourne]

Trigger warning: contains a christian homosexual Nazi white nationalist who fucks black men who literally quotes Mein Kampf for 10 minutes (not really).

One of the biggest issues with Climate Change is communication. I wrote a paper on it for one of my assignments before I graduated.

For anyone interested, it's publicly available. If you use it, please reference me? =D

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

It's aptly entitled, ‘Critically review the challenges for climate change communication in developing a better understanding of attitudes and behaviours towards global warming and response strategies.’

[Dug]

Is statistics a science? Biology is. Some left wingers have a tendency to ignore the bits of those they don't like, just as some right wingers ignore the bits of science they don't like.

You are kind of fucked, as you are going to have to argue in defence of the honesty of politicians to argue against my point and that is never a position you want to put yourself in.

You can't even ask for science denial that all left wing politicians argue in favour of, as not all right wing politicians deny climate change science.

Questioning statistics and the methods of coming to those conclusions isn't in the same realm of outright denial and "we just don't know". Sure I'll give you that some on the left have some nutty notions as well but a lot of times they're rooted in valid concerns such as anti-fracking because fracking does have cons.

But yes not all right wing politicians deny climate change but I wasn't trying to imply that they do just that it's a right wing notion.

[Kalis]

You think anti-fracking people are science deniers?

Some are, just as some anti-GMO people are, just as some Climate Change deniers are, then again some do it for ethical or financial reasons. Billions of people in the world, many with different reasons for doing the same things.

Moderate conservatives distance themselves from the far right all the time, which is fine. Why can't the left distance themselves from the far left? Do you know what horseshoe theory is? Of course I can claim they're not on the same side. It's not as simple as "left wing/right wing" I can denounce a SJW without being a hypocrite.

There is a difference between distancing yourself from them and denying they are on the left/right wing at all. Many anti-vaxxers are mainstream, so you can't even put them on the fringes of politics, they aren't a separate political group.

You're even saying in your own post

"I can't stand this whole notion that you get to claim they aren't really on the same general side (left or right) if you don't like them. "

Then say

"The trick is to have a different brand of left/right wing politics to the psychos and that way you can admit that Stalin was a leftie without it reflecting poorly on you also being a leftie."

So can your or can't you do that?

There is nothing contradictory there.

Right and left are huge political spectrums that contain wildly differing viewpoints. It is like a woman denying that a female child killer is female, simply because they refuse to accept women can kill children, it would be silly.

- - - Updated - - -

Questioning statistics and the methods of coming to those conclusions isn't in the same realm of outright denial and "we just don't know". Sure I'll give you that some on the left have some nutty notions as well but a lot of times they're rooted in valid concerns such as anti-fracking because fracking does have cons.

But yes not all right wing politicians deny climate change but I wasn't trying to imply that they do just that it's a right wing notion.

No, it is a US Republican Party thing, not a right wing thing.

As I have stated before, acceptance that man has adversely affected the climate and we need to do something about it, was pointed out by Margaret Thatcher decades ago and she is one the most influential right wing politicians of the last 50 years.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

The people most strongly against vaccines and GMOs tend to be on the left.

I think those issues are opposed equally by dumbasses on both the left and the right.

[Dug]

No, it is a US Republican Party thing, not a right wing thing.

As I have stated before, acceptance that man has adversely affected the climate and we need to do something about it, was pointed out by Margaret Thatcher decades ago and she is one the most influential right wing politicians of the last 50 years.

Well when I'm referring to right wing I'm talking about US republican party obviously. Doesn't really make sense for anyone else since ours is about the only country with a political party being outright deniers. Rest of the world is generally in agreement and discussing the steps we should be taking and yet here we are with Cheeto in Chief still debating if it's real or not.

[Kalis]

Well when I'm referring to right wing I'm talking about US republican party obviously.

This thread is not about the US. I pointed out it was a party political stance in a previous answer to you.

Doesn't really make sense for anyone else since ours is about the only country with a political party being outright deniers. Rest of the world is generally in agreement and discussing the steps we should be taking and yet here we are with Cheeto in Chief still debating if it's real or not.

What doesn't make sense is claiming that science denial is a right wing thing, when both sides have people that do it. That applies to the US as well.

Politicians are often opportunists, who will accept or deny whatever suits their argument. It is a problem with politics and it is a bipartisan problem.