Do they really think we are that stupid?

Once again scientists who support an idea that the right wing doesn’t like are being called stupid, liars, and greedy.  From the blog

The Costly Lies of Global Warming

A stunning report by a panel of international scientists casts doubt that man is the cause of global warming or climate change. The study concluded that “natural causes, not anthropogenic (man-made) causes, are very likely to be dominant.” This finding flies in the face of crucial climate policies and actions by President Obama and congressional Democrats.

They have wasted hundreds of billions of dollars in legislation and other expensive actions to fight greenhouse gases and limit CO2 arising from burning from fossil fuels. An untold number of jobs have been lost by the Administration’s deluded policies. Many Americans have been baffled and school children have been frightened by dire global warming lies over the past decade.

If America is to successfully recover from the Obama administration’s crippling economic government, then we must abolish the EPA. It is spreading lies and propaganda at the expense of the American people and a once thriving business sector. In its essence, the EPA is an Anti-American hate group which seeks to undo everything our founders worked so hard to fight for: liberty, freedom and the pursuit of the American dream.

The link in this blog is to the Heartland Institute
And yet from the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research comes this graph
See all the acronyms at the bottom – NCDC/NESDIS/NOAA?  It means that more than one organization with lots of scientists collected this data.    The line goes up.  It seems pretty obvious to even a non scientist.  So all these scientists, from all these organizations are telling lies?  Once again scientists are not to be trusted – this is rooted in the idea of original sin as I said yesterday – believing in something not in the Bible is a sin, sinners are bad, evil, liars etc. so they can’t be trusted.   Of course no one says this outloud – they merely talk only to people who already agree with them and call that proof.

4 thoughts on “Do they really think we are that stupid?

  1. It is unbelievable to me that there are intelligent, knowledgeable people who believe as you do. On second thought, I believe I was correct the first time; there aren’t any. You are obviously a card-carrying member of the “D and C” club – Denier and Conspiracy. Please take a step back and look at yourself. Examine how you go about arriving at your beliefs. What do your read? Who do you listen to? Are you getting facts or agenda-thinking? There is no doubt that there is climate change brought about by global warming that has been exacerbated by human activity, and its rate is accelerating. I wonder what your belief will be in, say, 2020, or better still, in 2050. Wake up!

    1. I think you misunderstood, which is probably my fault. I am not always as clear as I want to be, but I am striving for clarity and truth all the time. This is where I’m at right now. I know that climate change is affected by man’s actions (or lack of actions) – The pollution we are putting into the atmosphere affects our climate – I have seen the science. I like scientists, I like the work they do, and I believe that most of them are working toward the truth. The religious right has been trying to pass off their beliefs as science – go to the Discovery Institute – it is pretty apparent. What irks me is they say things that are not true in public forums, evidently believing that people will just believe them. why? Because the bible says so? I agree that their conspiracies based on what other conspiracy theorists say are nuts, ignorant, idiotic – I’m out of words without using a thesaurus. Listen, I am trying to steer clear of agenda-thinking (I haven’t heard that before, little clunky but better than Spin, or demagoguary blah). Here is the meat of the issue for me though – how to say these things are not true, without attacking someone’s faith. Faith is crucial for billions around the world. Faith is, in my opinion, a good thing. For people in the darkest of circumstances having faith is that someone is out there who loves them, that there is something better is not a crutch. We believe and have faith because we are human and it is in our nature. I know there are some strict rationalists (realists?) who believe a world stripped of faith and relying instead on only fact and reason would be better. I see the double edged sword of faith and religion, but I just think that dismissing someone’s faith is not the answer. As for what I read – right now I am reading,, and I am in love with right now. Also any news site I can get my hands on – CNN, MSNBC, BBC and other that does actual reporting. I don’t know all the answers, or even some of them. I know that truth is a life long pursuit. I agree with you, but I am hungry for more than just opinions – I want facts, I want context, I want conversation. I am sorry that I was so I unclear – I will keep on striving for clarity.

  2. Wow, what a dunce I am. I apologize, since I totally misread your commentary. This one makes great sense to me. I can nitpick a little, though. Human activity IS exacerbating global warming (there probably is a natural element to it as well), thus, humans are causing climate change. Our lack of actions is allowing it to get way ahead of us to the point that it may already be too late to prevent natural catastrophes on a massive scale in 20 to 50 years.

    Regarding “faith”. I would substitute “hope” for “faith”. I agree that having hope that the future will be OK is a good thing, but we must link that hope with proper actions. To just have “faith” or “hope” will do nothing more than make us feel good for the time being. Can’t you feel the unease in the “air”? I think most people have a dread of something really bad is going to happen. They don’t know exactly what; perhaps economic, or perhaps natural disasters, or perhaps political as in a nuclear war. I certainly feel it although I don’t let it ruin my day. I try to “act locally and think globally” as the advice goes. Taking some kind of positive action to change life for the better is a good thing.

    Again, I apologize for completely missing your point. I’m sitting in the corner with my dunce hat on.

  3. In my lifelong search for truth, I have grappled with two life options, given this possible, perhaps even probable, fact: Humans are just another type of animal no different in essence, purpose, or morality than a mouse, a lion, a chimpanzee, or even a flea or an apple. Obviously, humans have evolved unique survival traits and capabilities such as structured language and complex speech, abstract/symbolic thought, art, social mores, compassion, love, empathy, and so on.

    If the assumed fact is indeed fact, then is it better to (1) just reject this fact out of hand, remain ignorant of scientific truth (that discovered the fact), and fervently believe in one’s religion as the truth whatever that religion may be; or (2) embrace scientific facts with the full understanding of what that means (i.e., science is tentative, continually refining and revising its explanations as more evidence is discovered), and build a worldview that reflects the findings of science.

    Now, this is especially challenging if science is correct in that (a) there is no God, or at least no benevolent God who cares for and intervenes in the world (i.e., protects us and our loved ones); (b) there is no afterlife – when you die, you decompose and there is nothing left of you – no identity, soul, spirit or consciousness; (c) there is no overriding plan or purpose to the universe or to living things – they just live and they die. Look around – this appears to be so.

    So, what if option (1) “religion” actually results in more happiness for you and your family and friends than does option (2) “science”, even though you know you are rejecting known facts? Is ignorance bliss? Is living by option (1) being stupid, or being smart? On the other hand, is embracing “science” better, even if its findings depress you; and makes you afraid and unhappy?

    Obviously, there is at least a third option (3) embrace science and learn to be happy whatever the facts are. If there is no divine purpose, then create your own purpose. If there is no intrinsic value to life, create your own value. Face up to the fact that death ends all, and use that knowledge to make every moment of life count. Live in the “now” as they say.

    Someone may say there are other options: (4) religion-based life giving some credence to science; (5) science-based life giving some credence to religion. I personally don’t think either of these choices are different from (1) and (2) when it comes down to making profound choices – you will be on one side of the fence or the other.

    I believe the only option for a person who wants to live with personal integrity, being true to oneself, is option … Well, I’ll just keep that to myself and hope that you choose wisely.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s