Thursday, November 25, 2010

Global warming: We can't handle the truth anymore | The Economist

Debbie Downer says:

One of the little observed pieces of the human puzzle is that people don't really want to know things at all -- they prefer believing. Belief is easier and more emotionally satisfying than knowledge -- in the same way candy is more emotionally satisfying than broccoli: especially if you manage to keep your mental age under 4... which, we do.

Global warming: We can't handle the truth anymore | The Economist

hiho

6 comments:

Kevin Scheunemann said...

Just what is the "truth" on global warming?

The truth I see--if "global warming" does exist--I see a longer growing season for North America, a lusher, greener planet, because of the abundance of CO2 for plant life, and less consumption of Natural Gas to heat buildings in winter.

Why do so-called "progressives" consider that a "bad" thing?

Do you want your natural gas heating bill to be higher in winter?

I want to conserve and preserve natural gas, not consume natural gas reserves by advocating cooling the planet through destructive economic policies.

Did you see Al Gore reversed himself on use of corn ethanol? So when Al Gore ridiculed those against corn ethanol by using some version of calling those opposed to corn ethanol idiots, like you do to those who are skeptical of the warming religion, does this mean Gore was now wrong about the ethanol religion?

Since corn ethanol was environmental "truth" (religion) at one time, why is it verboten for us to question other environmental religions Al Gore tends to foam about from time to time?

Kewaskumite said...

There is a word which comes to mind to describe such phenomenon, Da Nile, and it is not just a river. One of the best descriptions I heard about denial recently was in Slavoj Zizek’s most recent book, Living in the End Times.

An object possesses a property x until the time t; after t, it is not only that the object no longer has the property x; it is that it is not true that it possessed x at any time. The truth-value of the proposition “the object O has the property x at the moment t” therefore depends on the moment when this proposition is enunciated. Jean-Pierre Dupuy

So right now, to some global warming is not true, but at some point it will not be that global warming was false and has become true, but rather that global warming was always true. However, until then it remains false, at least for a majority of republicans.

Kewaskumite said...

There is a word which comes to mind to describe such phenomenon, Da Nile, and it is not just a river. One of the best descriptions I heard about denial recently was in Slavoj Zizek’s most recent book, Living in the End Times.

An object possesses a property x until the time t; after t, it is not only that the object no longer has the property x; it is that it is not true that it possessed x at any time. The truth-value of the proposition “the object O has the property x at the moment t” therefore depends on the moment when this proposition is enunciated. --Jean Pierre Dupuy

So right now, to some global warming is not true, but at some point it will not be that global warming was false and has become true, but rather that global warming was always true. However, until then it remains false, at least for a majority of republicans.

Kewaskumite said...

There is a word which comes to mind to describe such phenomenon, Da Nile, and it is not just a river. One of the best descriptions I heard about denial recently was in Slavoj Zizek’s most recent book, Living in the End Times.

An object possesses a property x until the time t; after t, it is not only that the object no longer has the property x; it is that it is not true that it possessed x at any time. The truth-value of the proposition “the object O has the property x at the moment t” therefore depends on the moment when this proposition is enunciated. (Jean-Pierre Dupuy)

So right now, to some global warming is not true, but at some point it will not be that global warming was false and has become true, but rather that global warming was always true. However, until then it remains false, at least for a majority of republicans.

Kewaskumite said...

Kevin tell me you don't really believe that global warming doesn't exist and is not harmful

http://environment.about.com/b/2008/02/28/global-warming-leads-to-150000-deaths-every-year.htm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/russian-wheat-export-ban-threatens-higher-inflation-and-food-riots-2044769.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_weather_records

Kevin Scheunemann said...

If global warming exists:

The benefits outweigh and alleged costs.

Once you turn CO2 into a "pollutant", you grant government the right to dispose of any human, animal, or other creature that exhales that very "pollutant". It's a dangerous "progressive" notion that could eventually make North Korea look like a champion of human rights.

My house plants and trees in my yard love CO2. Are you taking the position my greenery should not thrive?