Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Global Warming Politics.; why politically polarizing?
Topic Started: Feb 19 2012, 11:48 PM (799 Views)
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Lets NOT discuss the validity and causes of GW, but the reason(s) it is polarizing and a political issue. It appears that the Cons deny the connection between man and GW whereas the Libs put the (perceived?) problem squarely on man made pollutants.
We are all riders on this space ship Earth, and what effects one effects all. Whats the deal?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I think it originates with Kyoto, which the US right wing views (with some justification) as a shift in wealth from rich countries to poor.

It also has to do with financial backing for the right wing from the worst polluters out there like Exxon.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
You would think the average man would tell the Exxons to go fish if they felt their lives were threatened by polution.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Thumper
Feb 20 2012, 12:21 AM
You would think the average man would tell the Exxons to go fish if they felt their lives were threatened by polution.
One would think, but the Fox has them brain-washed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
"It appears that the Cons deny the connection between man and GW whereas the Libs put the (perceived?) problem squarely on man made pollutants. "

As a libertarian, and conservative, I do not deny the connection. I am skeptical about various aspects. But this is getting into scientific questions and away from the political question.


"Global Warming Politics.; why politically polarizing?"

IMO, because some, be they lib or con, statist just the same, find achieving their ends by political means easier than by economic means. Such rent seeking, also called crony capitalism, has always been a problem.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Thump, it's pretty straightforward.

The Rightwingers look at it as one more way the government will interfere in their lives The most paranoid see it as an effort to promote One World Government.

Of course, in the long run, not doing anything about it will interfere in their lives far more, but they can ignore that for now.

Leftwingers are not as paranoid about government interference, and so are more willing to listen to Science.

There is a second, related problem: The Kochs and their Big Energy buddies are (correctly) very concerned that virtually any effort to clean up the mess will hurt their profits, and so they are pushing a multimillion dollar campaign to confuse the issue, having their "Think Tanks" pump out endless streams of BS which don't stand up to even halfway serious scrutiny, but take time to debunk.

It's much easier to blurt out a series of unsupported nonsense "reports" than it is to come up with serious, thoroughly researched rebuttles, which means that a relative handful of "skeptics" can waste huge amounts of the real scientist's time and money, and make it look like there's a real debate going on.

In fact, it's the Internet equivalent of the "Gish Gallop".
Quote:
 
The Gish Gallop is an informal name for a debating technique that involves drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood that has been raised. Usually this results in many involuntary twitches in frustration as the opponent struggles just to decide where to start. It is named after creationism activist and professional debater Duane Gish.
LINK

As I have said in several other posts, the ironic part of this whole debate is that if the Right succeeds, the ultimate outcome will be their own worst nightmare - an enormous worldwide government bureaucracy controlling every aspect of their lives while it tries to fend of the looming collapse of civilization.

Deniers will never admit it, of course, but it's we "warmists" who are trying to fend off this "One World Government".
Edited by Brewster, Feb 20 2012, 12:40 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I think that my main concern would be for my family not the wishes of any interest group, left or right.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Yes, but you're a rational person, Thump.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Can someone ask brewster if he thinks his liberal agenda can be achieved by economic means? So far I see him defending political means, which contradicts his whole left/right false dichotomy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
You ask him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis