LOL, I was replying to what you wrote. Exactly what you wrote...sorry that I read your words and took them literally.
Why do Republicans deny climate change?
- Thread starter BrianNole09
- Start date
LOL, I was replying to what you wrote. Exactly what you wrote...sorry that I read your words and took them literally.
Hurt feelings? I am talking about how hurting feelings of others is stupid strategy, you are the one embracing that insane approach.
Do you hold your kids to a higher standard than you do the other neighborhood kids?
You are starting to seem like the guy that will coach his son's youth sports teams just so you could play him more instead of the dad that does and makes them work even harder.
No, it's not "controversial". Maybe 10 or 20 year ago; but larger datasets and additional research has pretty much put that to bed.
Huh? Ozone has nothing to do with warming trends. We DECREASED the ozone layer during the warming trends!!! Are you TRULY this ignorant on this topic?
Then link their research and data.
4 out of 5 dentists recommend sugarless gum. The other 20% apparently think sugar does NOT contribute to tooth decay? Or, their ulterior motives are "more cavities equals more income"? You don't want to play the "follow the money game" here; the potential 'stranded assets' of fossil fuels will be 10,000 to 100,000 TIMES the amounts you're pointing to on climate science research. AINEC.
I'm not really here to support unIowa's theory or comments that you guys are debating between each other.
I don't want to mimic Donald Trump in any any way that I can think of. If you wanna say "Don't you want to "win?"... yes, but not the way he did. Between Trump's philosophy and behavior, and the Democrats playing "we like Bernie's support and message, but he's too committed to his principles" and shoving their corporate shills onto ballots, the severity of what is at stake from climate change is almost a lost cause.
WWJD abandoning this thread is a good example. When you're alienating people who are devout believers in the seriousness of climate change, then your politics are doing more harm than good. To be perfectly frank, if the ramifications of climate change are as severe as I have heard from some scientists, then our politics have finally met a situation it will not only NOT fix, but speed-up its outcome. And, the culprit isn't really politics, it's stubborn people who think they have to be right all the time.
That guy is really not worth wasting your time on... you know that. That guy would resist the reality of climate change even if Trump became the head of the ACLU.
But that's the problem. Your way, as I understand it, isn't going to fix the climate. It just isn't.
Voting D is the only option. It's not so much about who is right. It's just that history has proven independents can't win. It is also unlikely that Rs change their stance. So, my question to you and I'm being sincere here is this:
What are the other options? Maybe I'm not understanding you to some degree here.
I'm not lobbying for independent politicians here. I'm just laying-out what I see as impediments.
I think it would help greatly if people who are committed to this do better at swallowing their pride and trying to build bridges instead of burning them. Natural thinks this is a social behavioral issue- racism, bigotry, etc.. This is not the same thing at all. If we're fighting the clock, then this shaming and insulting crap isn't going to work.
I get that. But how do you build bridges with people who don't believe in it?
That's my question.
Slavery was always going to be a thing as well. We will never land on the moon or mars either.
Big change always has to start somewhere and it will most always start with the smallest of sparks.
By leading and breaking through their disbelief.
Someone is always being sold; either you are selling them on why they should move over or they are selling you on why they won't. Don't blame those who won't come over to your side, just work harder, refine your craft and more and more will make their way to you.
Well, how about this. You don't keep blowing up the bride once it's burned.
I just see the resistance to this being louder and more frequent, and the resolve gets stronger. It's really frustrating. Look at how quickly it shifted and strengthened with Trump. And, all of this was, basically, from nominating a terrible candidate. There's a prime example of the failure of relying on politics.
I don't think this is an issue that you can shame, insult and berate into correction. Unless we have a much larger window of time than I'm aware of to get it under control.
Do you honestly not think that we should call out racism and bigotry in all its forms, aggressively? I view this as a very loving thing to do. We defend people who are being oppressed.
We got complacent and allowed conservatives to be emboldened over the last 8 years leading up to what I truly believe is a last ditch effort to establish a right to be openly racist and proud of it. We need to shout that shit down, there is no other way to do it, as logic and reason already sways those capable of making decisions based on those factors.
I'm starting to agree that climate change is nearing that same point. NOT coincidentally, it is the same groups (primarily) who are wrong on both issues. You could do something to stop them, but choose not to. That's disappointing.
Apparently it's because Dems say things that hurt your feelings. They don't hurt mine, why is that? Don't we pretty much agree on these issues? What specifically is so hurtful, and don't say Nat, he doesn't speak for all Democrats.
Racism and bigotry are not the same issue as climate change. People's behaviors don't have a time limit on when they can be corrected.
The planet being inhabitable does.
So we should be even more aggressive about climate change than racism? Ok.
There's nothing of substance in this post.
Specifically how do you get people to believe in climate change who don't believe in it because Rush told them it is a liberal lie?
Climate change denial was a prevalent thing on the right long before Trump and Hillary's election. Stop making excuses.
I don't think this is an issue that is solvable by trying to convince the other side (whether by a nice way or harsh way).
I think we need to be careful when doing so as painting with too broad of a brush creates collateral damage and the sort of backlash we are seeing in our politics today. Iowa, Wisco, Ohio, Michigan didn't turn red on accident or because people suddenly became racist when the rich old white lady was running for the black guys position that won the states in the two elections prior.
Then I hope, for the sake of the species, that those who believe that climate change is a serious threat, are doing EVERYTHING they possibly can on a personal level to alleviate the effects. If half the population is beyond convincing, then spending ANY time berating them is time wasted, right? Why waste your time and effort on them at all? Why berate them? So you feel better? You're never going to convince them, so it must be an ego thing.
I guess it depends on how you define and exhibit aggression. Wasting your time ridiculing (and strengthening) your opposition seems like aggressive that doesn't benefit you. If you empower your opposition, then your aggression is misplaced. It's not helping you, it's hurting you.
I'm not trying to convince them. I've explained this to you several times. You clearly aren't getting it.
They need to be convinced or they don't, whatever. Technological advances and not politics (once again) seems to be our only real path forward. Oh, and many of those technological advances are here today so go get yourself some of them, I know it won't change the world but not doing it will make things just a bit worse.
I think I get it just fine.
Like I said, if you're not trying to convince them, then what good does insulting and berating them do? Except to strengthen their resolve to impede what you want to accomplish even more. You're burning bridges behind you and in front of you by doing that.
I'm not insulting or berating anyone.
If you are speaking in general, who is "them"? I don't see anyone berating you who is running for office. I could be wrong though.
There are three groups
Rs - It's not worth our time to convince them. They will never believe
Ds - They are already on board (with voting D)
Others (such as yourself and unIowa according to what you have said) - Many of these people already believe in climate change. What specifically (be specific, you have been very vague) do you want dems to do to win these voters over on this issue?
I don't think this crisis will be averted because Democrats win all of the elections. I think THAT is what they'd love for everyone to believe.
But, I think you make a great point. Technology and innovation, and encouraging as many people as you possibly can to do their part and get green (for the many benefits it affords short term and long term) are pro-active ways to go.
Sitting around berating simple-minded conservatives is hardly time well-spent to me. At least Joe's Place offers some data and tries to use some facts and circumstances instead of "You're a moron", "No! YOU are!"
I'm not really talking about you, specifically, berating them. I don't see you doing that on here. My apologies if you took that personal.
However, I do beelieve that some Republicans are intelligent and can be persuaded. Not all of them are the lowest-common-denominator "Trump That Bitch" Trump supporter.
Because there are still Trillion$ and Trillion$ of carbon based energy resources still in the ground.
Follow the money, as they say.
Exactly. I also get that democrats are better at providing these start up incentives HOWEVER we are at a tipping point technologically for the green disruption and Trump can't even stop it, he can barely slow it down. Green is happening and sooooo much old tech and ways of doing things are going to be turned on their head in the next decade.
Everyone should watch this, it is the short version of an hour or so presentation...it is great and yes banking/finance plays a big part.
With respect to racism, shouting it down aggressively is what got us so much progress. I think there was a large exhale when Obama won as if we'd finally made it to equality. Many racists who had been silent, lost their shit and got loud, and the response to that wasn't strong or loud enough. Probably because of the false hope that having a black president was an end to it.
I am of the opinion that shouting down bigotry is the right thing to do. Your point was that environmentalism is more dire. So it seems as if you're either advocating for more aggressive shouting down in regards to the environment, or you disagree that shouting down racists is right? Which is it?
Slavery wasn't ended through reason and polite persuasion. We went to the moon because the Russians scared us. Negative motivations are the catalysts for most real progress.
How many kids do you have? If any, quit having them, that would reduce your carbon footprint immensely.
It makes their position unpopular. Beating up uniowa will convince his friends and family that he is wrong. They will reject his political positions. The targets of ridicule aren't the prize, they are the tools.
I'm sure you're correct: He's someone who won't listen regardless and is a waste of time.
BUT, the bigger picture risk is that someone who IS able and willing to learn about the topic will hear and BELIEVE the disinformation spewed about, and a failure to correct the misinformation and lies leaves things open that someone 'on the fence' will then think there really IS a controversy. At least by pointing out the fallacies and fake information, there's a reasonable chance to reach those people, who maybe will call out/correct the disinformation for other people.
It takes a village, and you can't keep letting the disinformation go unchallenged. So what if he's a lost cause and will (once again) vanish like a fart in the wind when someone stands up to his fake facts and corrects him? Someone else will see that and realize what the real facts are.....
Last edited:
I'm not sure. I could imagine the discussions allowing slavery in our laws might have been very polite. How many times do you think Washington was called a racist by his fellow leaders? I think it took a long time for good people to gather the courage to call others out for their deplorable beliefs. But once called out, things changed. Calling deplorables to account is how change happens.
Similar threads
