Remember me
▼ Content

Why humans are so bad at thinking about climate change?


Why humans are so bad at thinking about climate change?17-11-2019 17:58
eddy15
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
The University of California is a pioneer on climate research, renewable energy and environmental sustainability. UC is dedicated to providing scalable solutions to help the world bend the curve on climate change. UC research is also paving the way for the university to meet its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2025. Read more about our commitment at https://dausel.co/w6liCm
17-11-2019 21:25
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
How come UC hasn't figured out how to control wildfires yet? It's been a huge problem in California, before climate change, and there doesn't seem to be any preventive, or mitigating practices, yet. Should they focus on deadly local problems, before working on global issues? What's the carbon footprint, for every acre burned? Wouldn't the wildfires be part of being carbon neutral in California? Can't make your 2025 goal, with out fixing a historical huge problem, that gets worse each year...
17-11-2019 22:29
James___
★★★★★
(3170)
HarveyH55 wrote:
How come UC hasn't figured out how to control wildfires yet? It's been a huge problem in California, before climate change, and there doesn't seem to be any preventive, or mitigating practices, yet. Should they focus on deadly local problems, before working on global issues? What's the carbon footprint, for every acre burned? Wouldn't the wildfires be part of being carbon neutral in California? Can't make your 2025 goal, with out fixing a historical huge problem, that gets worse each year...



There's a difference between wildfires and forest fires. Forest fires are good for the environment and ecosystems. At the same time they are essentially carbon neutral.
This is why a 2 party system like Republicans vs Democrats doesn't work. Common sense has become the enemy.
18-11-2019 00:34
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13293)
eddy15 wrote:
The University of California is a pioneer on climate research,

What's to research? A desert climate is always a desert climate. A marine climate is always a marine climate.
eddy15 wrote:
renewable energy

You mean oil, natural gas, wind, and solar energy?
eddy15 wrote:
and environmental sustainability.

You just said that.
eddy15 wrote:
UC is dedicated to providing scalable solutions to help the world bend the curve on climate change.

'Climate change' has a curve? What is the formula for this 'curve'? Define 'climate change'.
eddy15 wrote:
UC research is also paving the way for the university to meet its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2025.

So, you are tearing the whole place down by 2025? What are you going to do with the carbon compounds in the walls and bricks? What are you going to do with all the people? Kill them?
eddy15 wrote:
Read more about our commitment at https://dausel.co/w6liCm

I don't bother recording the paradoxes of people that are not here.

Keep your irrational advertisements to yourself, or make the case for your religions yourself.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
18-11-2019 10:42
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
How come UC hasn't figured out how to control wildfires yet? It's been a huge problem in California, before climate change, and there doesn't seem to be any preventive, or mitigating practices, yet. Should they focus on deadly local problems, before working on global issues? What's the carbon footprint, for every acre burned? Wouldn't the wildfires be part of being carbon neutral in California? Can't make your 2025 goal, with out fixing a historical huge problem, that gets worse each year...



There's a difference between wildfires and forest fires. Forest fires are good for the environment and ecosystems. At the same time they are essentially carbon neutral.
This is why a 2 party system like Republicans vs Democrats doesn't work. Common sense has become the enemy.


Carbon neutral? 100,000 acres burn in a week, more or less, releasing a considerable quantity of CO2. It take years for all those acres to recover, and recapture the same CO2. It's not the same areas burning every year...
20-11-2019 02:04
James___
★★★★★
(3170)
HarveyH55 wrote:
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
How come UC hasn't figured out how to control wildfires yet? It's been a huge problem in California, before climate change, and there doesn't seem to be any preventive, or mitigating practices, yet. Should they focus on deadly local problems, before working on global issues? What's the carbon footprint, for every acre burned? Wouldn't the wildfires be part of being carbon neutral in California? Can't make your 2025 goal, with out fixing a historical huge problem, that gets worse each year...



There's a difference between wildfires and forest fires. Forest fires are good for the environment and ecosystems. At the same time they are essentially carbon neutral.
This is why a 2 party system like Republicans vs Democrats doesn't work. Common sense has become the enemy.


Carbon neutral? 100,000 acres burn in a week, more or less, releasing a considerable quantity of CO2. It take years for all those acres to recover, and recapture the same CO2. It's not the same areas burning every year...



And it's created jobs in the southeast US. It is official policy in the EU while they say it might actually take a few decades for it to be carbon neutral. This agrees with the IPCC saying we need record levels of CO2 to save the ozone layer. Otherwise why is that not an issue like CO2 emissions are?
23-11-2019 11:27
Volker Siegel
☆☆☆☆☆
(4)
Carbon neutral? 100,000 acres burn in a week, more or less, releasing a considerable quantity of CO2. It take years for all those acres to recover, and recapture the same CO2. It's not the same areas burning every year...

Yes, it takes years, maybe a decade. But over some time it is neutral. There are no really old trees currently, and it will burn more often. Preventing trees from burning in California is what created the problem.
23-11-2019 18:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13293)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
How come UC hasn't figured out how to control wildfires yet? It's been a huge problem in California, before climate change, and there doesn't seem to be any preventive, or mitigating practices, yet. Should they focus on deadly local problems, before working on global issues? What's the carbon footprint, for every acre burned? Wouldn't the wildfires be part of being carbon neutral in California? Can't make your 2025 goal, with out fixing a historical huge problem, that gets worse each year...



There's a difference between wildfires and forest fires. Forest fires are good for the environment and ecosystems. At the same time they are essentially carbon neutral.
This is why a 2 party system like Republicans vs Democrats doesn't work. Common sense has become the enemy.


Carbon neutral? 100,000 acres burn in a week, more or less, releasing a considerable quantity of CO2. It take years for all those acres to recover, and recapture the same CO2. It's not the same areas burning every year...



And it's created jobs in the southeast US. It is official policy in the EU while they say it might actually take a few decades for it to be carbon neutral. This agrees with the IPCC saying we need record levels of CO2 to save the ozone layer. Otherwise why is that not an issue like CO2 emissions are?

CO2 has no effect on O3 or the ozone layer.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-03-2020 21:50
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(280)
Do smart people , lets say iq over 120, also fall for the global warming scam? I see a lot of politicians in my country who speak that we should go carbon neutral as soon as possible. Or maybe they play along with this scam and profit from it? I had a conversation with a woman who has been a chemist teacher all her life and when I told her that global warming is scam then she started to explain me the greenhouse effect and how it causes warming. How come smart people like teachers, politicians and scientist fall for this scam?
03-03-2020 23:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13293)
Xadoman wrote:
Do smart people , lets say iq over 120, also fall for the global warming scam?

Define 'smart people'.
Xadoman wrote:
I see a lot of politicians in my country who speak that we should go carbon neutral as soon as possible.

Quite a few politicians have trouble tying their own shoes.
Xadoman wrote:
Or maybe they play along with this scam and profit from it?

Many do.
Xadoman wrote:
I had a conversation with a woman who has been a chemist teacher all her life and when I told her that global warming is scam then she started to explain me the greenhouse effect and how it causes warming.

She is denying physics, specifically the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. She doesn't sound very smart to me.
Xadoman wrote:
How come smart people like teachers, politicians and scientist fall for this scam?

A credential or an election does not make someone smart. Teachers work for the government. So do most scientists. They must conform to the government agenda or they don't get paid.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 03-03-2020 23:27
04-03-2020 00:03
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(280)
Define 'smart people'.


As I said, iq over 120. They should quite independently figure out the global warming scam if they get basic physic in the school.


A credential or an election does not make someone smart. Teachers work for the government. So do most scientists. They must conform to the government agenda or they don't get
paid


Those people are lying. They should be in jail.
04-03-2020 00:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13293)
Xadoman wrote:
Define 'smart people'.


As I said, iq over 120.

IQ is a meaningless number. It does not indicate that someone is smart.
Xadoman wrote:
They should quite independently figure out the global warming scam if they get basic physic in the school.

They don't teach basic physics in school, at least in the U.S.
Xadoman wrote:

A credential or an election does not make someone smart. Teachers work for the government. So do most scientists. They must conform to the government agenda or they don't get
paid


Those people are lying. They should be in jail.

For what crime?

There is no law against a religion. The Church of Global Warming is a religion.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
04-03-2020 01:13
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(280)
IQ is a meaningless number. It does not indicate that someone is smart.


Yes it does.Iq over 120 should quite quickly independently figure out the global warming scam if they get basic physics in the school. Iq over 140 could probably figure it out even if they have not studied physics at all.

They don't teach basic physics in school, at least in the U.S.


I do not belive it.

For what crime?

There is no law against a religion. The Church of Global Warming is a religion.


It is a corruption. They use tax payers money to fund useless solar cell and windmills scam and profit from it pumping money into their pockets.
04-03-2020 02:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13293)
Xadoman wrote:
IQ is a meaningless number. It does not indicate that someone is smart.


Yes it does.Iq over 120 should quite quickly independently figure out the global warming scam if they get basic physics in the school. Iq over 140 could probably figure it out even if they have not studied physics at all.

Nope. Completely meaningless number.
Xadoman wrote:
They don't teach basic physics in school, at least in the U.S.


I do not belive it.

Believe it. Kids consistently come out as high school graduates and have never heard of F=mA.

Xadoman wrote:
For what crime?

There is no law against a religion. The Church of Global Warming is a religion.


It is a corruption. They use tax payers money to fund useless solar cell and windmills scam and profit from it pumping money into their pockets.

Guess you'll have to lock up practically every member of Congress then!



The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 04-03-2020 02:03
04-03-2020 02:58
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
Xadoman wrote:
IQ is a meaningless number. It does not indicate that someone is smart.


Yes it does.Iq over 120 should quite quickly independently figure out the global warming scam if they get basic physics in the school. Iq over 140 could probably figure it out even if they have not studied physics at all.

They don't teach basic physics in school, at least in the U.S.


I do not belive it.

For what crime?

There is no law against a religion. The Church of Global Warming is a religion.


It is a corruption. They use tax payers money to fund useless solar cell and windmills scam and profit from it pumping money into their pockets.


Having a high IQ, doesn't really make much difference. Being gullible. naive, trusting, have nothing to do with intelligence. What you learn from books, doesn't translate into practical experience. Not much od an education, if you learn from the wrong books. Faith, is not a function of intelligence either.

High IQ would only apply, if the individual is given only accurate, factual, and reliable information. It's not possible for one to know about all things, in great detail. Nobody lives long enough to redo everything learned and discovered, to independently verify. There is always the need for some level of trust, faith, that what you are being told, isn't a lie or deception.
04-03-2020 14:43
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(280)
Having a high IQ, doesn't really make much difference. Being gullible. naive, trusting, have nothing to do with intelligence. What you learn from books, doesn't translate into practical experience. Not much od an education, if you learn from the wrong books. Faith, is not a function of intelligence either.

High IQ would only apply, if the individual is given only accurate, factual, and reliable information. It's not possible for one to know about all things, in great detail. Nobody lives long enough to redo everything learned and discovered, to independently verify. There is always the need for some level of trust, faith, that what you are being told, isn't a lie or deception.


Maybe you are right. I did some googling to find out what ultra high Iq geniuses think about global warming.

For example Rick Rosner - Iq 190+ thinks as follows:

Rosner: Well one thing is becoming increasingly clear; that is if you are still denying climate change, you are more and more of an idiot. There is some point in history where you might have been able to make reasonable arguments that climate change was not a big deal. But that point was maybe ten years ago, and the window for not being an idiot has closed. If you are still arguing that it doesn't exist and that there is no reason to get so worked up over it... then yeah, you are a stone schmuck.



Chris Langan 200+ Iq somewhat dodges the question about gobal warming here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9arr5g4Aeg

He is concerned about overpopulation and he said that he has some models that predict climate change but he does not know yet which way the climate changes. Basically he says that he knows nothing.

Marylin vos Savant, iq 228, post in Twitter in 2017:
How are we going to halt global warming when we can't even get rid of smog?


It seems that she belives in global warming.


It amazes me that those super high Iq people have not studies basic physics. In his interview Langan says that he has a mathematical proof of God s existance. How come such highly gifted people are so blind in some areas. Imagine how easy is to fool ordinary people.
04-03-2020 16:43
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
Xadoman wrote: Maybe you are right. I did some googling to find out what ultra high Iq geniuses think about global warming.

I'm not sure about any correlation between being smart and understanding science. All the omniscient people seem to believe fervently in violations of physics.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist




Join the debate Why humans are so bad at thinking about climate change?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Understanding Earth Map: Global Warming Climate Change Caused By Humans Stupid Activities507-08-2020 12:25
Nature stops humans burning fossil fuel101-05-2020 19:13
wishful thinking1527-04-2020 06:05
Bad news...021-04-2020 20:42
Poll:Good idea or bad idea?8510-03-2020 17:57
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact