« Green Turning Brown | Main | All Animals Are Equal »

Climate Truthers

Climate 'trutherism': the conspiracy theory that's no joke | Sahil Kapur | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

One group of these conspiracy theorists, however, has even succeeded in bringing its theory into the mainstream. These are the people who deny that human activity is contributing to climate change, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary – call them the "climate truthers", for lack of a better term.
Climate trutherism embodies the lynchpin of most conspiracy theories: the belief that a group of influential people is coordinating a wide-ranging cover-up to advance their interests by bamboozling the rest of us. Doubting human-caused climate change requires the same paranoid logic as, say, doubting that the 9/11 attacks caught Bush officials by surprise, or that President Obama's birth certificate is a forgery. But rather than believing that we're being lied to by the Bush White House or Obama's mother and the state of Hawaii, you're required to believe that we're being lied to by nearly every scientist and scientific institution in the world.
mitigating global warming really does require government intervention in the energy industry, so it must be a leftwing, "big government" plot. What binds all these conspiracy theorists together is the belief that their ideological opponents are evil masterminds engaged in a cabal: healthy scepticism turned pathological.
There exists a somewhat tamer brand of climate trutherism, which takes a different tack: rather than attack or challenge the science head-on, its proponents merely assert that the science is unsettled. This is simply obfuscation, designed to exploit misconceptions.
To wit, the scientific consensus is so strong that you must either believe manmade climate change is real or you have to believe there's a massive conspiracy going on. There's hardly a third option.
...it takes courage to call out climate truthers, because some of them are very influential. But that's why it's more important.

Oh what a brave little soldier he is, being rude about everyone who doesn't toe the party line, it takes courage to to stand behind every Government and apparently every scientist and defend them.
Because if you have the slightest doubt about any aspect of the Climate Change scare or the prescribed response to it you are a "Climate Truther" and evil. Nuances don't come into it.

Grown ups might like Skeptic Strategy for Talking About Global Warming | Watts Up With That? though.

Comments

All I can say in response to being labelled a "climate truther" is "wibble wibble". Just because I am labelled as such, does not make me any less convinced that AGW/Global Warming/Climate Change is all my fault for driving to the shops.

If anything, the proponents of such nonsense are living up to my label of "Climatologists"

It's a stupid term, not for lack of a better term but because it's not a "conspiracy theory" when you can prove the well-established links, all the incentives, and the money-flow that produces a flawed politically-driven, un-scientific outcome on demand.

Ahh, a conspiracy. Would that include what we discovered when all those emails were leaked and massive lying and covering up anything that didn't show global warming was exposed? Was that a conspiracy? And the article "assumes" there is actual PROOF of AGW. I have never seen ANY "proof". Certainly there is ample proof of global warming, we know the climate has been warming since about 1850. What, exactly, was the "proof" that man did something in 1850 to begin global warming? I doubt anyone, scientist or pundit would even try to answer that and would consider it meaningless. But global warming did indeed begin about then. It continued to warm until it peaked about 1934. It then began to cool until about the mid 70's. What, exactly, did humans do between 1850 to cause the warming? Then what did humans do between 1934 and the mid 70's to make it cool? I have never seen any proof. I have seen theories and conjecture and some major political profiteering from those theories. But ZERO proof! Those who embrace AGW accept it like a religion and their idea of proof seems to be nothing more then that humans are putting huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. That's it!!! That is what they think is proof and any arguement or other opinions defines you as a conspiracy theorist. What caused the global warming of the 11th century?? What cause the many similar global warming and global cooling cycles prior to this one? Which is "normal" the climate in the 16th century (Maunder minimum) Or the climate during the 11th century (Medieval Warm Period). If it were the latter then we are actually in a cold spell because the Medieval Warming period was warmer then our current warming period. If the Maunder Minimum was the norm then thank god it has warmed up because a global cooling will not allow us to grow enough food to support 7 billion people. Those two naturally occurring climate cycles are fact! No theory, no human influence, they occurred and that is fact. How??? Well of course we know how. The earth does in fact go through alternate cooling and warming cycles. It has been doing this since the last ice age. This particular global warming cycle is the 33rd since the last ice age. Where is the evidence that this series of cycles have ended and now this particular global warming is the fault of humans? I'm not comfortable with the blind faith approach to matters of science. If there is proof please demonstrate it.

Post a comment