News2 mins ago
Why Does The Left So Enthusiastically Embrace Climate Change?
Is it because it sits nicely with their anti capitalist agenda?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dave50. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Why Does The Right So Enthusiastically Deny Climate Change?"
https:/
https:/
Danny, about as much as the OP has about his assertion.
Incidentally, I don't think the left supports cc, maybe he meant they support the assertion that it is happening, which is a different thing. Anyone who would actually support cc would be really odd - perhaps in favour of some sort of Malthusian reduction in planetary population by reduction in the numbers of poor people who would be unable to buy their way to survival. Now what type of person would wish for such a thing?
Incidentally, I don't think the left supports cc, maybe he meant they support the assertion that it is happening, which is a different thing. Anyone who would actually support cc would be really odd - perhaps in favour of some sort of Malthusian reduction in planetary population by reduction in the numbers of poor people who would be unable to buy their way to survival. Now what type of person would wish for such a thing?
Given that the scientific evidence is pretty unambiguous that (a) Climate Change is happening, (b) it's (mainly) our fault right now, and (c) it's not going to end well, then surely everybody should be embracing the need for action against climate change.
In that sense it probably is better to reverse the question: why is it generally people on the right who not only resist action but also seem determined to justify this by ignoring the evidence? The answer is I guess the same either way round, though: dealing with Climate Change requires a fundamental shift in how we manage our resources and our economy, one that is difficult to square with a purist form of capitalism.
In that sense it probably is better to reverse the question: why is it generally people on the right who not only resist action but also seem determined to justify this by ignoring the evidence? The answer is I guess the same either way round, though: dealing with Climate Change requires a fundamental shift in how we manage our resources and our economy, one that is difficult to square with a purist form of capitalism.
We should all embrace climate change, it is happening and there is little, if anything we can do about it.
So I think the question you really mean t was why do the left embrace man made cause of climate change. To answer that, firstly I think it tends to be the liberal left and eco warriors rather than 'the left' and secondly because it suits their agenda.
"I think that science overwhelmingly supports the thesis that cc is occurring. "
Agreed, but it does not conclusively support the cause of it. The algorithms used to produce future predictions are very flawed.
So I think the question you really mean t was why do the left embrace man made cause of climate change. To answer that, firstly I think it tends to be the liberal left and eco warriors rather than 'the left' and secondly because it suits their agenda.
"I think that science overwhelmingly supports the thesis that cc is occurring. "
Agreed, but it does not conclusively support the cause of it. The algorithms used to produce future predictions are very flawed.
// Agreed, but it does not conclusively support the cause of it. The algorithms used to produce future predictions are very flawed. //
I don't think the fact part of this is right -- it's almost certain that human activity is driving the present period of Climate Change, and the only bit missing is the inevitable lack of absolute certainty, which is after all completely impossible in practical science.
As to the second part, I have no doubt that climate models still require continuous improvement, but I think there are at least two points you're missing: "needs improvement" is not remotely the same thing as "(fundamentally) flawed" (I've added the "fundamentally" but I don't think it is far from the claim you're making, apologies if I've overstated your position ymb); and, in practice, there isn't a single topic of research in current science that doesn't have some gap in understanding. The only reason that the gaps in Climate Science receive so much attention is because it's to certain groups' benefits to exaggerate them in order to justify ignoring it. But if, to take a random example, it mattered politically what to do in response to the latest models of Particle Physics, then you can guarantee that there'd be some pressure group stressing the muon g-2 and P5' anomalies* as somehow crippling for the entire theory.
*Ask in a separate thread.
I don't think the fact part of this is right -- it's almost certain that human activity is driving the present period of Climate Change, and the only bit missing is the inevitable lack of absolute certainty, which is after all completely impossible in practical science.
As to the second part, I have no doubt that climate models still require continuous improvement, but I think there are at least two points you're missing: "needs improvement" is not remotely the same thing as "(fundamentally) flawed" (I've added the "fundamentally" but I don't think it is far from the claim you're making, apologies if I've overstated your position ymb); and, in practice, there isn't a single topic of research in current science that doesn't have some gap in understanding. The only reason that the gaps in Climate Science receive so much attention is because it's to certain groups' benefits to exaggerate them in order to justify ignoring it. But if, to take a random example, it mattered politically what to do in response to the latest models of Particle Physics, then you can guarantee that there'd be some pressure group stressing the muon g-2 and P5' anomalies* as somehow crippling for the entire theory.
*Ask in a separate thread.
"it's almost certain "
And that says it all.
Jim, you know as well as I do most of it is guesswork and in science many times if you set out to find an answer you will inevitably find it. After all science is just the fact until someone else comes along to disprove it.
I think you may be saying that above but just to make sure I have put it in my opn words.
Just out of interest do you discount Natural causes as a factor in 'climate change' ?
And that says it all.
Jim, you know as well as I do most of it is guesswork and in science many times if you set out to find an answer you will inevitably find it. After all science is just the fact until someone else comes along to disprove it.
I think you may be saying that above but just to make sure I have put it in my opn words.
Just out of interest do you discount Natural causes as a factor in 'climate change' ?
// They are communist in china and they are giving the issue a thorough ignoring. //
Not entirely true -- which is, if anything, rather pathetic that China can sort of claim to be at or near the head of the drive towards renewable energy. China, it is true, is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, and also continues to grow its emissions annually. But it's also investing heavily in clean energy sources -- offset massively by its continued growth of coal-fired power, making the effort redundant. I'm also doubtful of their motives in investing in renewable energy under the present regime.
Not entirely true -- which is, if anything, rather pathetic that China can sort of claim to be at or near the head of the drive towards renewable energy. China, it is true, is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, and also continues to grow its emissions annually. But it's also investing heavily in clean energy sources -- offset massively by its continued growth of coal-fired power, making the effort redundant. I'm also doubtful of their motives in investing in renewable energy under the present regime.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.