Important climate change warning

[txdpd]

Natural gas deposits can be up to 500 million years old. Coal deposits were formed about 300 million years ago. Oil deposits 65-250 million years old. About 65 million years ago the Chixculub meteor struck earth, and wiped out 75% of life on earth. (A useless tidbit is that was a fast mass extinction taking place over 1-2 million years.) Life as we know it developed in a short period time with all that carbon trapped deep under the earth. I don’t know why anyone would think putting that back in the atmosphere is anything but a bad idea, because we are delving deep into the unknown.

I don’t buy into global warming thing, I do worry about the carbon.

[JTQ]

... weigh consequences of being wrong against the reasonableness of the extra effort.

I guess most skeptics probably wonder what "the reasonableness of the extra effort" entails.

Listening to the loudest talkers on the "global warming (climate change) is going to ruin the planet in the next few years" crowd, it sounds like the use of coal, natural gas, oil, wood/dung/peat/etc., and nuclear needs to stop immediately to save the planet. If so, that's a pretty big "extra effort".

[JTQ]

Life as we know it developed in a short period time with all that carbon trapped deep under the earth. I don’t know why anyone would think putting that back in the atmosphere is anything but a bad idea, because we are delving deep into the unknown.

I don’t buy into global warming thing, I do worry about the carbon.

I don't disagree, but I notice folks concerned with the issue of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere always display carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a bar graph of percentage increase rather than showing the composition of the earth's atmosphere as a pie chart.

For instance, if a single police department adopts the .38 Super as their chosen round, the percent increase of police officers choosing the .38 Super as a duty round would be huge. However, the overall use of .38 Super as a police duty round would still be quite a bit below 1%.

[Joe in PNG]

Going back to the first post, the biggest reason people don't listen to those proposing climate change, is the fact that the climate change advocated keep pulling the same wrong "We Have (X) Years Before We Are DOOMED!!!!" BS.

If you are serious, and seriously believe it, go to work on those who keep posting this nonsense.

Because you have NO CREDIBILITY- 0, non, nil, zilch, bupkiss, null, none on this issue if you keep supporting panicy panic mongering. While it may be old, cishetwhiteparticahy, the old story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf comes to mind.

[Borderland]

Going back to the first post, the biggest reason people don't listen to those proposing climate change, is the fact that the climate change advocated keep pulling the same wrong "We Have (X) Years Before We Are DOOMED!!!!" BS.

If you are serious, and seriously believe it, go to work on those who keep posting this nonsense.

Because you have NO CREDIBILITY- 0, non, nil, zilch, bupkiss, null, none on this issue if you keep supporting panicy panic mongering. While it may be old, cishetwhiteparticahy, the old story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf comes to mind.

Greta Thornberg sounds like a boomer raging about the neighbors dog shit on her front lawn. New virus strains will probably kill more people in the next 100 years than climate change will. And so what if climate change does kill a few million people, there's always going to be something horrific to deal with like high capacity magazines and Nazis.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

When someone as obstinate as @RevolverRob has given up preaching on climate change, despite that being his actual academic specialty, it really says a lot about just how entrenched people are on the issue. Remember this? https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....nmental-idiocy

Honestly, I feel like this thread is detrimental to the forum as a whole. The lead admin throws down a clickbait image, without context, and we have the majority of posters joining in the anti-CC echo chamber. This does nothing but reinforce the views of the skeptics, furtherer alienate those on this board that do believe in anthropogenic climate change, and seemingly makes obvious the forum leadership's view on a highly partisan topic.

I don't know, I find this thread to be pretty typical for PFC...you have some hard no, some full buy-in, some middle ground, and lots of pretty reasonable discussion.

I'm a middle grounder and I don't feel like my opinions are not welcome. Nobody has given me any static for stating that I think the mechanism of climate change as popularly described seems probable to me. I'm sure some people disagree but I think that since I am not particularly strident about it and I am pretty open about the criticisms I have about the climate change movement, people just find me to be a reasonable person who is willing to discuss the topic.

But I don't see how anyone can blame people for their skepticism when so much of the general ideological regime we've all been living with revolves around social engineering to achieve goals most of us find repellent.

And more than most I think shooting enthusiasts know how frequently "science" has been a tool of the establishment to enforce certain constructs, and this is a particularly politicized issue so the odds of the science being reliable are worse than usual. AND we've all personally witnessed the inaccuracies of predictions for decades now. It all adds up to a very difficult pill to swallow so expecting people who have often been on the sharp end of the "scientific research" stick to just quiet down and listen to the experts is just not realistic.

And it may not even be desirable. Almost regardless of the situation, I feel better about dealing with ongoing challenges if I'm with a whole lot of cantankerous but skeptical, inquisitive, active thinkers who challenge orthodoxy and can't be bossed around than I do about being in the same situation with a whole bunch of people who are perfectly happy following directions and listening to whatever the experts told them.

I just have more faith in groups of active thinkers working to aggregate information as they encounter it than I do in specialists, particularly on topics which are broad, complex, and may include a lot of unknown variables.

Put another way, if I want Fermat's last theorem solved I'll ask mathematicians but if I want to build a civilization, I'll take a cross section of intelligent people working independently over the professional opinion of a handful of social psychologists any day, no matter what percentage of social psychologists agree with the opinion they're expressing.

[Joe in PNG]

To me, it boils down to this- I'm being told that there is a crisis severe enough that I need to surrender my life, my liberty, and my property to fix it.

Naturally, I am going to be skeptical to an extraordinary degree. I need Beyond a Reasonable Doubt- Control of the Facts or Preponderance of Evidence is not enough for this trial.

So, first of all, are the experts credible? Well, they have a history of making specific predictions of specific outcomes with specific timelines- and they have been wrong.

Are the experts objective? Well, they do get money for agreeing with a certain point of view- and are ostracized if they don't.

Are the experts acting as if they truly believe it's a threat? Not really.

[Borderland]

When someone as obstinate as @RevolverRob has given up preaching on climate change, despite that being his actual academic specialty, it really says a lot about just how entrenched people are on the issue. Remember this? https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....nmental-idiocy

Honestly, I feel like this thread is detrimental to the forum as a whole. The lead admin throws down a clickbait image, without context, and we have the majority of posters joining in the anti-CC echo chamber. This does nothing but reinforce the views of the skeptics, furtherer alienate those on this board that do believe in anthropogenic climate change, and seemingly makes obvious the forum leadership's view on a highly partisan topic.

[Tom Duffy]

Honestly, I feel like this thread is detrimental to the forum as a whole. The lead admin throws down a clickbait image, without context, and we have the majority of posters joining in the anti-CC echo chamber. This does nothing but reinforce the views of the skeptics, furtherer alienate those on this board that do believe in anthropogenic climate change, and seemingly makes obvious the forum leadership's view on a highly partisan topic.

Well said. When you're the moderator of the General Discussion forum, it's maybe OK to start threads on like Civil War Monuments as divisive as a thread like that turned out to be. When you run the whole show, it's no longer acceptable. You're now responsible for a pistol forum. Guess it's going to be the Gospel according to St. Rupert of Murdoch for awhile.

[Totem Polar]

One more thing about experts: they often gain their expertise by studying "at the feet" of the previous experts. While this is *clearly* a net benefit in terms actually moving all of humanity’s collective knowledge forward, it can occasionally result in generational reproduction of errors. I’ve certainly seen that in my field, since a lot of water has gone under the bridge since 1979, 1989, or even 1999. We have a lot more access to past original work, as well as current experiments via the internet; we know a lot more about acoustics; and there’s been an explosion of research on how we learn in the 2000s—and yet, there are folks who were experts at the front end of their careers in 1979 who are still at it today, turning out several generations of minted experts who reproduce their lessons as gospel, even though some of the gospel has been found in error, elsewhere.

Ultimately—getting back to Zeus for a sec (I’m reaching for a tie-in; work with me here) we are pretty sure that 95 percent of the experts in 1000bc, along with everyone else, thought that the old dude with the ops beard threw lighting at them, and on occasion came down disguised as a bull/goose/shower of gold/someone’s husband to pull a Taran Tactical on hot young things. Such can be the way of authoritarian consensus.

JMO.

ETA: #modshereareshit